| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add more sanity checks around callers of changeDependencyFor() |
| Date: | 2023-07-10 14:51:24 |
| Message-ID: | 2091513.1689000684@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 10:09:20AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I also don't think pg_dump will dump the changed schema, which means a
>> dump/restore leads to a different schema - IMO something to avoid.
> Yes, you're right here. The function dumped is restored in the same
> schema as the extension.
Actually, I think the given example demonstrates pilot error rather
than a bug. The user has altered properties of an extension member
object locally within the database, but has not changed the extension's
installation script to match. The fact that after restore, the object
does again match the script is intended behavior. We've made some
exceptions to that rule for permissions, but not anything else.
I don't see a reason to consider the objects' schema assignments
differently from other properties for this purpose.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-07-10 14:51:58 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-07-10 14:47:12 | Re: remaining sql/json patches |