Re: check_function_bodies: At least the description seems wrong, since we have prodedures

Daniel Westermann (DWE) <daniel.westermann@dbi-services.com>

From: "Daniel Westermann (DWE)" <daniel.westermann@dbi-services.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-04-10T07:56:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

>> It's possible the parameter name also appears in documentation for
>> out-of-tree PLs, as each PL's validator function determines what
>> "check_function_bodies" really means in that setting.

>That parameter is also set explicitly in pg_dump output, so we
>can't rename it without breaking existing dump files.

>Admittedly, guc.c does have provisions for substituting new names
>if we rename some parameter.  But I'm not in a hurry to create
>more instances of that behavior; the potential for confusion
>seems to outweigh any benefit.

>+1 for updating the description though.  We could s/function/routine/
>where space is tight.

Thanks for your inputs. Attached a proposal which updates the description.

Regards
Daniel

Commits

  1. Doc: update documentation of check_function_bodies.