* Simon Riggs (simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 17:43 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Even this doesn't cover everything though- it's too focused on tables
> > and data loading. Where do functions go? What about types?
> Yes, it is focused on tables and data loading. What about
> functions/types? No relevance here.
I don't see how they're not relevant, it's not like they're being
excluded and in fact they show up in the pre-load output. Heck, even if
they *were* excluded, that should be made clear in the documentation
(either be an explicit include list, or saying they're excluded).
Part of what's driving this is making sure we have a plan for future
objects and where they'll go. Perhaps it would be enough to just say
"pre-load is everything in the schema, except things which are faster
done in bulk (eg: indexes, keys)". I don't think it's right to say
pre-load is "only object definitions required to load data" when it
includes functions and ACLs though.
Hopefully my suggestion and these comments will get us to a happy
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: laser||Date: 2008-07-21 01:39:54|
|Subject: Any reason not to return row_count in cursor of plpgsql?|
|Previous:||From: Radek Strnad||Date: 2008-07-21 01:15:56|
|Subject: Re: [WIP] collation support revisited (phase 1)|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: daveg||Date: 2008-07-21 01:49:42|
|Subject: Re: pg_dump additional options for performance|
|Previous:||From: Tatsuo Ishii||Date: 2008-07-21 01:13:58|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECUSIVE patches 0717|