Re: [HACKERS] COPY does not work with regproc and aclitem
От | Zdenek Kotala |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] COPY does not work with regproc and aclitem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4540C20F.8020900@sun.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] COPY does not work with regproc and aclitem (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-patches |
Alvaro Herrera napsal(a): > Zdenek Kotala wrote: >> Tom Lane napsal(a): >>> Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes: >>>> I prepared patch which use oid output function instead regproc output. >>>> This change works only for COPY TO command. >>> This is not a bug and we're not going to fix it, most especially not >>> like that. >> OK, The behavior of regproc type is described in the documentation, but >> if we don't fix it, than Some error message like "Regproc data type is >> not supported by COPY TO command" could be useful. Because you find that >> something is wrong when you want to restore data back and it should be >> too late. > > But it works as "expected". If the approach you suggest would be one we > would take, then it should emit the same error on SELECT as well, > shouldn't we? It is right. > I think the problem is that regproc COPY is not useful to you for your > particular use case. But there are workarounds, like the one I > suggested and you promptly ignored. Yes, I read your suggestion It is useful form me thanks for that. But I thought how to remove that regproc limitation or how to avoid some confusing. Current mention about regproc limitation/behavior in the documentation is really best solution. By the way, If I read carefully your suggestion, Tom's answer and documentation, correct solution (theoretical) is replace regproc by regprocedure datatype in the catalog, but there is problem in the boostrap phase? Thanks Zdenek
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: