Re: pg_dump as a bunch of PostgreSQL functions
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump as a bunch of PostgreSQL functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6895.1095171573@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | pg_dump as a bunch of PostgreSQL functions (Mark Gibson <gibsonm@cromwell.co.uk>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump as a bunch of PostgreSQL functions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Mark Gibson <gibsonm@cromwell.co.uk> writes: > I have an idea, to break pg_dump into functions within PostgreSQL. This strikes me as largely useless, because the problems that are actually hard for pg_dump are not at the level of individual objects; they have to do with problems like determining a safe dump order and altering definitions to break circularities in the dump requirements. I don't think that extending the pg_get_xxx family of functions would make pg_dump's life easier by any measurable amount. There is also a fundamental problem with the current pg_get_xxx functions, which is that they rely on backend-internal catalog operations that generally use SnapshotNow semantics. This is not what we want to guarantee that pg_dump dumps a consistent snapshot --- we need to look at catalog rows that existed as of pg_dump's serializable snapshot, instead. We have gotten away with it so far because pg_dump starts by taking read locks on every table in sight, and that is sufficient to block schema changes on the tables. But extending the pg_get_xxx approach to non-table-related objects would be seriously dangerous. (I think pg_get_viewdef is already broken, actually, since you can't lock a view.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: