Re: Dumping/restoring fails on inherited generated column
От | Anastasia Lubennikova |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Dumping/restoring fails on inherited generated column |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0f57d5e9-4112-1ba8-64d8-c02062c1e95d@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Dumping/restoring fails on inherited generated column (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Dumping/restoring fails on inherited generated column
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09.11.2020 13:43, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 2020-11-06 04:55, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> Both of these result in the same change to the dump output. Both of >>> them have essentially the same idea. The first one adds the >>> conditionals during the information gathering phase of pg_dump, the >>> second one adds the conditionals during the output phase. >>> >>> Any further thoughts? >> I think the first one is better than the second (mine) because it can >> save the number of intermediate objects. > > I was hoping to wrap this issue up this week, but I found more > problems with how these proposed changes interact with > --binary-upgrade mode. I think I need to formalize my findings into > pg_dump test cases as a next step. Then we can figure out what > combination of tweaks will make them all work. > I am moving this patch to the next CF, but it looks like the discussion is a bit stuck. Peter, can you please share your concerns about the interaction of the patch with --binary-upgrade mode? If you don't have time to write tests, you can just describe problems. -- Anastasia Lubennikova Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: