Re: BUG #15572: Misleading message reported by "Drop function operation" on DB with functions having same name

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Ash M <makmarath@hotmail.com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-02-19T16:45:59Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:31 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Yeah, exactly.  Not only do I not feel a need to change this behavior
>> in the back branches, but the original patch is *also* an API change,
>> in that it changes the behavior of what appears to be a well-defined
>> boolean parameter.  The fact that none of the call sites found in
>> core today would care doesn't change that; you'd still be risking
>> breaking extensions, and/or future back-patches.

> Extensions calling those functions with old true/false values probably
> won't get any warning or error during compile.  Is is something we
> should worry about or is it enough to keep the same behavior in this
> case?

Yeah, I thought about that.  We can avoid such problems by assigning
the enum values such that 0 and 1 correspond to the old behaviors.
I didn't look to see if the proposed patch does it like that right
now, but it should be an easy fix if not.

			regards, tom lane


Commits

  1. Improve error reporting for DROP FUNCTION/PROCEDURE/AGGREGATE/ROUTINE.