Re: [HACKERS] dump a comment of a TSDictionary
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] dump a comment of a TSDictionary |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 30638.1488847201@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [HACKERS] dump a comment of a TSDictionary (Giuseppe Broccolo <giuseppe.broccolo@2ndquadrant.it>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] dump a comment of a TSDictionary
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Giuseppe Broccolo <giuseppe.broccolo@2ndquadrant.it> writes: > I've seen that pg_dump execute the dump of an eventual comment of a > TSDictionary without specifying the namespace where it is defined: > https://github.com/postgres/postgres/blob/master/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c#L13542 Yup, this is clearly an error --- thanks for spotting it! I've pushed a fix for this and related mistakes. > This is actually a problem if a new TSDictionary is created, in a different > schema specified by the dumped search_path setting. Just out of curiosity, do you have a concrete test case where it failed that way? AFAICS the emitted SQL would be like SET search_path = schema1, pg_catalog; CREATE TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY somedict (...); COMMENT ON TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY somedict IS '...'; SET search_path = schema2, pg_catalog; CREATE TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY somedict (...); COMMENT ON TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY somedict IS '...'; so it should accidentally work anyway. It's possible that a parallel restore would get it wrong, or that a schema-selective restore would omit comments it should include, but I couldn't reproduce a failure in simple cases. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: