Re: BUG #12465: Materialized view dump restoration issue
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #12465: Materialized view dump restoration issue |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 13445.1420839491@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #12465: Materialized view dump restoration issue (Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #12465: Materialized view dump restoration issue
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> writes: > On 2015-01-09 21:42, Tom Lane wrote: >> This is not a pg_dump bug, this is a broken definition of function a(). >> That function will fail in any context where the caller changes >> search_path, not only pg_dump. You can perhaps get away without that >> in a single-schema database, but not with multiple schemas. > AFAIK there isn't a way to write inlineable SQL functions in relocatable > extensions in that way, since you don't know which schema they end up > installed in. The original test case comes from PostGIS. You can do it for relocatable-at-install-time extensions, as suggested in the manual: CREATE FUNCTION ... SET search_path = @extschema@ ... > But I think the bigger problem is that naively thinking it shouldn't be > this easy to create unrestorable databases. But perhaps I'm being > overly naive. Well, if you know how to inform pg_dump what random assumptions about search_path exist in the functions invoked by a matview (or expression index, or some other cases), let me know. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: