Re: OPERATOR FAMILY and pg_dump

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Abbate <jma(at)freedomcircle(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OPERATOR FAMILY and pg_dump
Date: 2011-09-07 16:10:04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Joe Abbate <jma(at)freedomcircle(dot)com> writes:
> If a basic operator family is created, e.g.,
> create operator family of1 using btree;
> shouldn't pg_dump include this in its output? If not, why?

Quoting from the pg_dump source code:

* We want to dump the opfamily only if (1) it contains "loose" operators
* or functions, or (2) it contains an opclass with a different name or
* owner. Otherwise it's sufficient to let it be created during creation
* of the contained opclass, and not dumping it improves portability of
* the dump.

I guess if it contains no opclasses and no operators either, this code
won't dump it, but isn't it rather useless in such a case?

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kohei KaiGai 2011-09-07 16:19:16 Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-09-07 16:05:40 Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem