Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20130601151625.GB6732@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-06-01 11:07:53 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes: > > On 05/31/2013 08:46 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> Changing SQL syntax in the back-branches isn't normally something > >> we do, but I confess I don't see any real reason not to do it in > >> this case. > > > That was part of my hesitation, but I don't see any better way to fix > > existing installations and this is pretty well self-contained. Any > > other opinions out there? > > I don't like this approach much. > > 1. It does nothing to fix the issue in *existing* databases, which > won't have pg_depend entries like this. Well, you can now write an extension upgrade script that adds the missing dependencies. To me that sounds better than letting it fiddle with pg_depend. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: