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 <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1tL2BW-00CIPl-9F
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:30:02 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1tL2BT-006D6N-E9
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:30:00 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1tL2BT-006D6F-5X
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:30:00 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls
 TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1tL2BN-0026Au-MQ
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:29:59 +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 4BAFTqUl066805;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:29:52 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Artur Zakirov <zaartur@gmail.com>
cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump crash on identity sequence with not loaded attributes
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKNkYnwTypJPsc258ZwVJ+n_Ti-8VxiQ6Gy4oMPmCA9fKo+KKg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAKNkYnwXFBf136=u9UqUxFUVagevLQJ=zGd5BsLhCsatDvQsKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4137493.1733781111@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKNkYnwTypJPsc258ZwVJ+n_Ti-8VxiQ6Gy4oMPmCA9fKo+KKg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Artur Zakirov <zaartur@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 10 Dec 2024 16:21:33 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <66803.1733844592.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:29:52 -0500
Message-ID: <66804.1733844592@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/66804.1733844592%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Artur Zakirov <zaartur@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 at 22:51, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> -       if (owning_tab->dobj.dump == DUMP_COMPONENT_NONE &&
>> +       if ((owning_tab->dobj.dump & DUMP_COMPONENT_DEFINITION) &&

> I think it is necessary to use negation in this condition.

D'oh, of course.  But what's your thoughts on the other points?
Is this what we want to do at all?

			regards, tom lane