Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator, redux
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator, redux |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13031.1356021220@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator, redux (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I was thinking a NOTICE at most. If it's a WARNING then restoring >> perfectly valid pg_dump files will result in lots of scary-looking >> chatter. You could make an argument for printing nothing at all, >> but that would probably mislead people who'd fat-fingered their >> COMMUTATOR entries. > What about jiggering the dump so that only the second of the two > operators to be dumped includes the COMMUTATOR clause? Seems messy and fragile. In particular this'd represent a lot of work in order to make it more likely that the restore malfunctions if someone makes use of pg_restore's -l switch to reorder the entries. Also it would not retroactively fix the problem for restoring dumps made with existing pg_dump versions. > Even a NOTICE in > pg_dump seems like too much chatter (witness recent quieting of some > other NOTICE messages we've all grown tired of) pg_dump has included "set client_min_messages = warning" in its output for quite some time now. So as long as we don't insist on making this a WARNING, people won't see it in that usage. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: