Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Instead of DROP function use UPDATE pg_proc in anupgrade extension script - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vicky Vergara
Subject Re: Instead of DROP function use UPDATE pg_proc in anupgrade extension script
Date
Msg-id MWHPR11MB1789A5C5285F0A15FFCA46378A0B0@MWHPR11MB1789.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Instead of DROP function use UPDATE pg_proc in an upgrade extension script  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view

Thanks,

you answered so fast that I know I am stepping into dangerous grounds.

But I would like to know more about your experience.

Any links that you can give me to read about the code and/or issues regarding the ip4r experience?


Vicky




De: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Enviado: lunes, 3 de abril de 2017 11:28 p. m.
Para: Vicky Vergara
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Asunto: Re: [HACKERS] Instead of DROP function use UPDATE pg_proc in an upgrade extension script
 
>>>>> "Vicky" == Vicky Vergara <vicky_vergara@hotmail.com> writes:

 Vicky> UPDATE pg_proc SET [...]

 Vicky> So, I want to know how "safe" can you consider the second
 Vicky> method, and what kind of other objects do I need to test besides
 Vicky> views.

Speaking from personal experience (I did this in the upgrade script for
ip4r, in a much simpler case than yours, and broke it badly), it's not
at all safe.

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Parallel Bitmap Heap Scan - Prefetch pages are notupdated properly
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum and bt_page_items(bytea)