| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | depesz(at)depesz(dot)com, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?! |
| Date: | 2012-01-31 15:54:28 |
| Message-ID: | 4F280EB4.30401@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 01/30/2012 11:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> [ example showing pg_dump's odd behavior for extension config tables ]
> [ traces through that with gdb... ]
>
> As I suspected, the behavioral change from 9.1 to HEAD is not
> intentional. It is an artifact of commit
> 7b070e896ca835318c90b02c830a5c4844413b64, which is almost, but not
> quite, entirely broken. I won't enumerate its shortcomings here,
> because they're not really relevant, but it does seem appropriate to
> discuss exactly what we think *should* happen for tables created inside
> extensions.
I'm perplexed about what you thing the patch does wrong or how it affects this. If I've broken something I'd like to know how, exactly, so I have a chance to fix it.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nykolyn, Andy (AS) | 2012-01-31 16:08:24 | Intermittent occurrence of ERROR: could not open relation |
| Previous Message | Tulio | 2012-01-31 15:10:36 | Re: parameter "vacuum_defer_cleanup_age" |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gabriele Bartolini | 2012-01-31 15:55:42 | Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2012-01-31 15:35:35 | Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock) |