Re: BUG #8695: Reloading dump fails at COMMENT ON EXTENSION plpgsql
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #8695: Reloading dump fails at COMMENT ON EXTENSION plpgsql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140410121108.GA6917@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #8695: Reloading dump fails at COMMENT ON EXTENSION plpgsql (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:13:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > That's what I thought too, but I see a schema file in pg_extensions: > > Read the manual. > > > Should we hard-code a pg_catalog plpgsql to be skipped in pg_dump? > > No, I don't think so. > > The real issue here is that we don't have a notion of a "built-in > extension". I think this was specifically debated back when we > extension-ified plpgsql, though I don't recall details of why > we ended up not doing that. Maybe the idea was that you could > drop and then re-add plpgsql? Anyway, I think this is not such > a simple issue and a one-line hack in pg_dump is not likely to > improve matters. OK, I added a TODO: Prevent PL/pgSQL comment from throwing an error in a non-superuser restore -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. +
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: