Re: Should partial dumps include extensions?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Should partial dumps include extensions?
Date: 2011-05-26 12:24:44
Message-ID: 1306412684.25317.0.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On tis, 2011-05-24 at 23:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > There's a complaint here
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2011-05/msg00714.php
> > about the fact that 9.1 pg_dump always dumps CREATE EXTENSION commands
> > for all loaded extensions. Should we change that? A reasonable
> > compromise might be to suppress extensions in the same cases where we
> > suppress procedural languages, ie if --schema or --table was used
> > (see "include_everything" switch in pg_dump.c).
>
> Making it work like procedural languages seems sensible to me.

The same problem still exists for foreign data wrappers, servers, and
user mappings. It should probably be changed in the same way.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message panam 2011-05-26 12:33:37 Re: Hash Anti Join performance degradation
Previous Message Dave Page 2011-05-26 12:22:50 Re: Latch implementation that wakes on postmaster death on both win32 and Unix