Re: [9.1] 2 bugs with extensions
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [9.1] 2 bugs with extensions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 28591.1351178705@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [9.1] 2 bugs with extensions (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: [9.1] 2 bugs with extensions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> No, just remove the RELKIND_UNCATALOGUED case in that switch. > Oh. As in the attached? :) I don't think you tested this patch in 9.2 or HEAD, because it bleats like mad. I installed an extension containing create sequence extseq; select pg_catalog.pg_extension_config_dump('extseq', ''); into the regression database, and then did: $ pg_dump -Fc regression >r.dump pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order pg_dump: [archiver] WARNING: archive items not in correct section order The reason is that it calls dumpSequence() to emit the SEQUENCE SET archive item during table-data dumping, but the archive item gets marked SECTION_PRE_DATA. As of 9.2 we have to be rigid about keeping those section markings correct and in-sequence. This is not really right in 9.1 either (wouldn't be surprised if it breaks parallel restore). The fact that SEQUENCE SET is considered pre-data has bitten us several times already, eg http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2012-05/msg00084.php I think it may be time to bite the bullet and change that (including breaking dumpSequence() into two separate functions). I'm a little bit worried about the compatibility implications of back-patching such a change, though. Is it likely that anybody out there is depending on the fact that, eg, pg_dump --section=pre-data currently includes SEQUENCE SET items? Personally I think it's more likely that that'd be seen as a bug, but ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: