Subject: Re: SQL-standard function body
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <1c11f1eb-f00c-43b7-799d-2d44132c02d7@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CA+TgmoZ-FXU0iyevFETN0sGYw0RKTSCFxKONGE+2nVJEM5_8OQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <493812.1593541480@sss.pgh.pa.us> <494838.1593543098@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20210418185546.GC1500781@rfd.leadboat.com> <92408.1618772924@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20210418211505.GA7256@telsasoft.com> <142618.1618781618@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <964466e9-6b6c-c0ae-6277-a44e80229299@enterprisedb.com>
 <2659727.1619540213@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Message-ID: <cfe5eac0-64ea-01d0-8ebc-94a16869490f@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 16:41:58 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2659727.1619540213@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cfe5eac0-64ea-01d0-8ebc-94a16869490f%40enterprisedb.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 27.04.21 18:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> That's kind of a lot of complication, and inefficiency, for a corner case
> that may never arise in practice.  We've ignored the risk for default
> expressions, and AFAIR have yet to receive any field complaints about it.
> So maybe it's okay to do the same for SQL-style function bodies, at least
> for now.
> 
>> Another option would be that we disallow this at creation time.
> 
> Don't like that one much.  The backend shouldn't be in the business
> of rejecting valid commands just because pg_dump might be unable
> to cope later.

Since this is listed as an open item, I want to clarify that I'm 
currently not planning to work on this, based on this discussion. 
Certainly something to look into sometime later, but it's not in my 
plans right now.