Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pg_dump --split patch

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump --split patch
Date: 2011-01-02 07:48:47
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On tis, 2010-12-28 at 12:33 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> (2) randomly different ordering of rows within a table.  Your patch
> didn't address that, unless I misunderstood quite a bit.

This issue here is just comparing schemas, so that part is a separate
problem for someone else.

> I think the correct fix for (1) is to improve pg_dump's method for
> sorting objects.  It's not that bad now, but it does have issues with
> random ordering of similarly-named objects.  IIRC Peter Eisentraut
> proposed something for this last winter but it seemed a mite too ugly,
> and he got beaten down to just this:
> commit 1acc06a1f4ae752793d2199d8d462a6708c8acc2
> Author: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
> Date:   Mon Feb 15 19:59:47 2010 +0000
>     When sorting functions in pg_dump, break ties (same name) by
> number of arguments

Yes, that was addressing the same underlying problem.  Frankly, I have
been thinking split files a lot before and since then.  If the files
were appropriately named, it would remove a lot of problems compared to
diffing one even perfectly sorted big dump file.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2011-01-02 07:54:31
Subject: Re: pg_dump --split patch
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-01-02 05:32:10
Subject: management of large patches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group