Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> I think it may be time to bite the bullet and change that (including
>> breaking dumpSequence() into two separate functions). I'm a little bit
>> worried about the compatibility implications of back-patching such a
>> change, though. Is it likely that anybody out there is depending on the
>> fact that, eg, pg_dump --section=pre-data currently includes SEQUENCE SET
>> items? Personally I think it's more likely that that'd be seen as a
>> bug, but ...
> Specifically, I'm thinking this, which looks rather bulky but most of
> the diff is from reindenting the guts of dumpSequence().
I see that you commited that patch, thanks a lot Tom!
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Fujii Masao||Date: 2012-11-02 14:51:37|
|Subject: Re: Synchronous commit not... synchronous?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-11-02 14:41:14|
|Subject: Re: Bug in ALTER COLUMN SET DATA TYPE ?|