Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b4a47096-6e01-6e28-4884-286d9dd881b3@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering? (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/22/17 5:38 PM, Michael Banck wrote: >> diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump_sort.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump_sort.c >> index ea643397ba..708a47f3cb 100644 >> --- a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump_sort.c >> +++ b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump_sort.c >> @@ -26,6 +26,9 @@ static const char *modulename = gettext_noop("sorter"); >> * Sort priority for database object types. >> * Objects are sorted by type, and within a type by name. >> * >> + * Because materialized views can potentially reference system views, >> + * DO_REFRESH_MATVIEW should always be the last thing on the list. >> + * > I think this comment is overly specific: any materialized view that > references a view or table in a different schema (pg_catalog or not) > will likely not refresh on pg_restore AIUI, so singling out system views > doesn't look right to me. This isn't a matter of excluded schemas. The problem is that if you had a matview that referenced a system view for something that was restored after DO_REFRESH_MATVIEW (such as subscriptions) then the view would be inaccurate after the restore. Stephen, hopefully that answers your question as well. :) -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com 855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: