Re: pg_dump bug in 9.4beta2 and HEAD

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg_dump bug in 9.4beta2 and HEAD
Date: 2014-08-14 13:11:46
Message-ID: 20140814131145.GA7096@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 08/14/2014 06:53 AM, Joachim Wieland wrote:
> >I'm seeing an assertion failure with "pg_dump -c --if-exists" which is
> >not ready to handle BLOBs it seems:
> >
> >pg_dump: pg_backup_archiver.c:472: RestoreArchive: Assertion `mark !=
> >((void *)0)' failed.
> >
> >To reproduce:
> >
> >$ createdb test
> >$ pg_dump -c --if-exists test (works, dumps empty database)
> >$ psql test -c "select lo_create(1);"
> >$ pg_dump -c --if-exists test (fails, with the above mentioned assertion)
>
> The code tries to inject an "IF EXISTS" into the already-construct
> DROP command, but it doesn't work for large objects, because the
> deletion command looks like "SELECT pg_catalog.lo_unlink(xxx)".
> There is no DROP there.

Ah, so this was broken by 9067310cc5dd590e36c2c3219dbf3961d7c9f8cb.
Pavel, any thoughts here? Can you provide a fix?

We already have a couple of object-type-specific checks in there, so I
think it's okay to add one more exception for large objects.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2014-08-14 13:13:27 Re: pg_dump bug in 9.4beta2 and HEAD
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2014-08-14 13:01:53 pgbench throttling latency limit