Re: Re: C language function dump problem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: Re: C language function dump problem
Date
Msg-id 3.0.5.32.20000710103830.0094fc40@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: C language function dump problem  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Re: C language function dump problem  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 13:25 9/07/00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
>> It seems some code disappeared from pg_dump.c between 7.0.2 and current,
>> ...
>> P.S. The specific problem is that it now uses plsrc as the definition for
>> all functions, whereas the (C language) plpgsql call handler requires plbin
>> to be used.
>
>Now that I think about it, the code was actually broken before that,
>because for a C-language function it needs to produce two AS items
>specifying the link symbol and the library path.  Looks like we
>neglected to update pg_dump when that feature was added.
>

Looking at the code, it *seems* that I should be able to (in pseudo-code):

if ( finfo[i].probin != "-")   defn = defn || "AS " || finfo[i].probin;

if ( finfo[i].prosrc != "-")   defn = defn || "AS " || finfo[i].prosrc;

ie. Use probin is it is not "-", and use prosrc if it is not "-".

This gets around hard coding for C & newC, so reduces the chance of
problems in the future...I think. 

Does that sound reasonable to everyone?



----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498)             |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL vs. MySQL
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: C language function dump problem