Re: pg_dump versus rules, once again

On 30 December 2016 at 11:58, Benedikt Grundmann <bgrundmann(at)janestreet(dot)com>
wrote:

>
> On 17 November 2016 at 03:45, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> >>> The changes in pg_backup_archiver.c would have to be back-patched
>> >>> into all versions supporting --if-exists, so that they don't fail
>> >>> on dump archives produced by patched versions.
>> >
>> >> Even if you patch future minor releases, past minor releases are still
>> >> going to exist out there in the wild for a long, long time.
>> >
>> > Yeah, but it would only matter if you try to use pg_restore --clean
>> --if-exists
>> > with an archive file that happens to contain a view that has this issue.
>> > Such cases would previously have failed anyway, because of precisely
>> > the bug at issue ... and there aren't very many of them, or we'd have
>> > noticed the problem before. So I don't feel *too* bad about this,
>> > I just want to make sure we have a solution available.
>>
>> Right, OK.
>>
>
> For what it is worth we just run into this problem on our postgres 9.2.17
> installation on a hunch we (after reading Tom's initial email replaced the
> view that caused this by this
>
> create view ... as select * from (...original view definition...)
> hack_around_pg_dump_versus_rules_bug;
>
> Which caused pg_dump to change its behavior and instead emit create view
> .... which is what we wanted (because we take filtered down and dependency
> ordered outputs of pg_dump as the starting point for new patches to the
> db). But it surprised me mildly that the hack "worked" so I thought I
> would mention it here. It might just mean that I'm misunderstanding the
> bug but if there was really a dependency in the original that dependency
> still exists now.
>
>
N/m turns out that using pg_dump -t <viewname> isn't a good way to test if
the hack works because than it always does the good thing.

>
>> --
>> Robert Haas
>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>>
>
>