Re: pg_dump sort priority mismatch for large objects

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 06:05:26PM +0530, Nitin Motiani wrote:
>> I looked through the history of this to see how this happened and if it
>> could be an existing issue. Prior to a45c78e3284b, dumpLO used to put large
>> objects in SECTION_PRE_DATA. That commit changed dumpLO and also changed
>> addBoundaryDependencies to move DO_LARGE_OBJECT from pre-data to data
>> section. Seems like since then this has been inconsistent with
>> pg_dump_sort.c. I think the change in pg_dump_sort.c should be backported
>> to PG17 & 18 independent of the state of the larger patch.

> +1, if for no other reason than we'll need it to be below PRIO_TABLE_DATA
> for the speed-up-pg_upgrade-with-many-LOs patch [0]. Does anyone see any
> problems with applying something like the following down to v17?

That's clearly an oversight in a45c78e3284b. I agree that fixing
pg_dump_sort.c to match shouldn't create any functional difficulties.
It might make the topological sort step marginally faster by
reducing the number of ordering violations that have to be fixed.

regards, tom lane