PostgreSQL – Find Substrings Between Two String Fragments

The approach you're using is unnecessarily complex - and very inefficient. Instead of the first function use:

create or replace function compute_pair_id_value(id bigint, value integer)
    returns setof pair_id_value
as $$
SELECT $1, generate_series(0,$2);
$$                          
language sql;

or better, get rid of it entirely and write the whole operation like this:

-- Sample data creation:
CREATE TABLE my_obj(id bigint, obj_value integer);
insert into my_obj(id,obj_value) VALUES (1712437,2),(17000,5);

-- and the query:
SELECT id, generate_series(0,obj_value) FROM my_obj;

Resulting in:

regress=> SELECT id, generate_series(0,obj_value) FROM my_obj;
   id    | generate_series 
---------+-----------------
 1712437 |               0
 1712437 |               1
 1712437 |               2
   17000 |               0
   17000 |               1
   17000 |               2
   17000 |               3
   17000 |               4
   17000 |               5
(9 rows)

This exploits PostgreSQL's behaviour with set-returning functions called in the SELECT list. Once PostgreSQL 9.3 comes out it can be replaced with a standards-compliant LATERAL query.

Since it turns out your question was a simplified version of the real problem, let's tackle that. I'll work with the simplified compute_pair_id_value above to avoid the hassle of plpython3. Here's how to do what you want:

SELECT (compute_pair_id_value(id,obj_value)).* FROM my_obj;

Result:

regress=> SELECT (compute_pair_id_value(id,obj_value)).* FROM my_obj;
   id    | value 
---------+-------
 1712437 |     0
 1712437 |     1
 1712437 |     2
   17000 |     0
   17000 |     1
   17000 |     2
   17000 |     3
   17000 |     4
   17000 |     5
(9 rows)

but again, be warned that compute_pair_id_value will be called more than once. This is a limitation of PostgreSQL's query executor that can be avoided in 9.3 with LATERAL support, but as far as I know you're stuck with it in 9.2 and below. Observe:

create or replace function compute_pair_id_value(id bigint, value integer)
    returns setof pair_id_value
as $$
BEGIN
  RAISE NOTICE 'compute_pair_id_value(%,%)',id,value;
  RETURN QUERY SELECT $1, generate_series(0,$2);
END;
$$             
language plpgsql;

output:

regress=> SELECT (compute_pair_id_value(id,obj_value)).* FROM my_obj;
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(1712437,2)
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(1712437,2)
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(17000,5)
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(17000,5)
   id    | value 
---------+-------
 1712437 |     0
 1712437 |     1
 1712437 |     2
   17000 |     0
   17000 |     1
   17000 |     2
   17000 |     3
   17000 |     4
   17000 |     5
(9 rows)

See how compute_pair_id_value is called once per output column?

There is a workaround: Another layer of subquery to unpack the composite type result. See:

regress=> SELECT (val).* FROM (SELECT compute_pair_id_value(id,obj_value) FROM my_obj) x(val);
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(1712437,2)
NOTICE:  compute_pair_id_value(17000,5)
   id    | value 
---------+-------
 1712437 |     0
 1712437 |     1
 1712437 |     2
   17000 |     0
   17000 |     1
   17000 |     2
   17000 |     3
   17000 |     4
   17000 |     5
(9 rows)

You can use the same technique in your code if you really must LOOP over the results (it's slow to do that, so avoid it if you can).

You seem to have omitted the new version of the upgraded server, but I strongly suspect it's still on 8.1 since the ALTER SEQUENCE ... OWNED BY clause was added in 8.2 (Compare ALTER SEQUENCE docs on 8.2 to ALTER SEQUENCE docs on 8.1).

You really need to understand that 8.4 and 8.1 aren't slightly different versions, they're massively different. It's like saying that Windows Vista and Windows 7 are "slightly different" versions because they're Windows versions 6.0 and 6.1 respectively. Or that Mac OS X 10.4 and 10.7 are "slightly different"... when they're more incompatible than not.

Yes, I know the version numbering in PostgreSQL is stupid; it's a historical oddity we seem to be stuck with despite periodic attempts to change it. See the version policy document linked in the prior answer for more information about what the versioning means, and read the release notes for a better understanding.