From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump does not refresh matviews from extensions |
Date: | 2017-02-22 23:41:56 |
Message-ID: | dbe9d2c7-31e1-f1af-bf63-accb3b895452@BlueTreble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/21/17 2:05 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> As for $SUBJECT, I feel like it really depends, doesn't it? If the
> extension creates the matview w/ no data in it, and doesn't mark it as a
> config table, should we really refresh it? On the other hand, if the
> extension creates the matview and either refreshes it, or something
> else refreshes it later, then perhaps we should do so too, to get us
> back to the same state.
I didn't think to test marking the matview as dumpable. If I do that
then a refresh item does get created, and it's actually based on whether
the view contains any data. We should at least document that.
Now that I know that, I guess I'm kinda on the fence about doing it
automatically, because AFAIK there'd be no way to override that
automatic behavior. I can't really conceive of any reason you wouldn't
want the refresh, but since it's not happening today...
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-02-23 00:00:33 | Re: Packages: Again |
Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2017-02-22 23:38:25 | Re: Change in "policy" on dump ordering? |