From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
cc: Erki Eessaar <erki.eessaar@taltech.ee>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
        "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: INFORMATION_SCHEMA.routines column routine_definition does not
 show the source
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKFQuwZaihWCaR4T=4Ov9ufk7jipRbBBtEDon61XMYOU6qkhxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <AM9PR01MB8268D5CDABDF044EE9F42173FE8C9@AM9PR01MB8268.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
 <CAKFQuwZaihWCaR4T=4Ov9ufk7jipRbBBtEDon61XMYOU6qkhxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 03 Nov 2021 08:21:34 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <134215.1635957998.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 12:46:38 -0400
Message-ID: <134216.1635957998@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/134216.1635957998%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> The information schema query consults pg_proc.prosrc directly instead of
> calling pg_get_functiondef(...) (which didn't exist when the original query
> was written, and hasn't been wrong until now).

pg_get_functiondef would produce more than we want, but it looks like
pg_get_function_sqlbody() would do.

BTW, while researching this I noted the header comment for
pg_get_functiondef:

 * Note: if you change the output format of this function, be careful not
 * to break psql's rules (in \ef and \sf) for identifying the start of the
 * function body.  To wit: the function body starts on a line that begins
 * with "AS ", and no preceding line will look like that.

Needless to say, the SQL-function-body patch has ignored this advice
totally.  At the very least this comment needs to be adjusted, but
I wonder if it's not telling us that \ef and/or \sf are broken.

			regards, tom lane