| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martín Marqués <martin(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions |
| Date: | 2016-09-08 17:17:05 |
| Message-ID: | 19374.1473355025@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Martn Marqus <martin(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> This is v4 of the patch, which is actually a cleaner version from the
>> v2 one Michael sent.
> Let's do as you suggest then, and just focus on the schema issue. I
> just had an extra look at the patch and it looks fine to me. So the
> patch is now switched as ready for committer.
Pushed with cosmetic adjustments (mainly, I thought the comment needed
to be much more explicit).
I'm not sure whether we want to try to fix this in older branches.
It would be a significantly larger patch, and maybe more of a behavior
change than we want to make in stable branches. So I'm inclined to call
it done at this point.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Claudio Freire | 2016-09-08 17:18:49 | Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-09-08 17:13:21 | Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |