Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> /* check for duplicate name (more friendly than unique-index failure) */
>> if (SearchSysCacheExists2(TYPENAMENSP,
>> CStringGetDatum(name),
>> ObjectIdGetDatum(nspOid)))
>
> Hmm, this check is wrong anyway, because you're looking in the pg_type
> syscache for objects from an arbitrary catalog. That needs to be fixed
> somehow, but perhaps it needs to be handled by the callers, not in this
> routine. Otherwise you're going to need to pass the syscache ID, as
> well as Datums identifying the object, and the number of Datums.
How embarrassing. I wonder why this works, too:
dim=# alter operator utils.@>(utils.ltree, utils.ltree) set schema public;
ALTER OPERATOR
dim=# alter operator @>(utils.ltree, utils.ltree) set schema utils;
ALTER OPERATOR
We have :
static void
AlterOperatorNamespace_internal(Relation rel, Oid operOid, Oid nspOid)
{
...CheckSetNamespace(oldNspOid, nspOid, OperatorRelationId, operOid, NameStr(oprForm->oprname));
Well, I'll go fix as you say, putting the check back into the
callers. That won't help a bit with the code duplication feeling we have
when reading the patch, though. Any idea on this front?
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
