Re: pg_dump and dependencies and --section ... it's a mess
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump and dependencies and --section ... it's a mess |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23326.1340317544@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump and dependencies and --section ... it's a mess (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump and dependencies and --section ... it's a mess
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > If I'm understanding you correctly, fixing the bogus dependency thing is > more an insurance policy than fixing a case (other than the constraint > dependency) that is known to be broken. Right. That's the only *known* broken case, and it does seem like we'd have heard by now about others. Also, what I have in mind will cause at least HEAD, and however far we back-patch it, to actively complain if it runs into a case where the sections can't be separated, rather than silently outputting items in a funny order as now. So if there are any more cases lurking I think we'll hear about them quickly, and then we can evaluate whether further backpatching is required. > (There's another bug to do with parallel pg_restore and clustering that > Andrew Hammond raised back in January, that I want to fix when I get > some time.) Hm, I guess I've forgotten that one? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: