Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfSXC-000Gtz-NL for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:36:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfSXB-00Fhp2-9P for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:36:17 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfSXB-00Fho5-1E for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:36:17 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfSX7-001vRb-OY for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:36:16 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 41SMaDtt2549131; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:36:13 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Andrew Dunstan cc: Jim Wilson , pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Feature bug dumpall CREATE ROLE postgres In-reply-to: <8663cc11-4a1c-68fa-d950-fdc863f28f4b@dunslane.net> References: <2149099.1709064762@sss.pgh.pa.us> <8663cc11-4a1c-68fa-d950-fdc863f28f4b@dunslane.net> Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan message dated "Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:31:18 -0500" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2549129.1709159773.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:36:13 -0500 Message-ID: <2549130.1709159773@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Andrew Dunstan writes: > What if we just skip creating the role if it's the bootstrap superuser > in the source and has the same name as the bootstrap superuser in the > destination, using some DO processing? Hmm ... pg_dump has never used any DO blocks in its output, and I'm not sure it's a great idea to start. Seems like the kind of decision we could regret down the road, given the possible need for pg_restore to parse the output. regards, tom lane