From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_dump assertion failure with "-n pg_catalog"
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2023 14:29:41 +0900
Message-ID: <ZIvzRTPWILVZ2Z5b@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7c1adfe66542eca348de7485990abfabdbc1086.camel@j-davis.com>
References: <ce071503fee88334aa70f360e6e4ea14d48305ee.camel@j-davis.com>
<ZIbAuHfnWY05VxVt@paquier.xyz>
<e7c1adfe66542eca348de7485990abfabdbc1086.camel@j-davis.com>
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 03:47:59PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> The new patch does add about 40 net lines, though.
I have looked at dumps generated from servers down to 9.2, and these
seemed OK.
> Given that it fixes an obscure issue, I'm not even sure if it should be
> backported -- perhaps it could just go in 17 as more of a cleanup than
> a bugfix?
Not sure to agree about this point. The first version where this
happens is v15, meaning that two branches are impacted currently. So
the cost of backpatch is minimal.
> Even aside from the issue fixed by this patch, there are other warnings
> emitted when dumping pg_catalog related to types with typtype='p' and
> typisdefined=t.
Right, there are 14 of them, except _record. This is actually much,
much older than the collation bits.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql@j-davis.com
Subject: Re: pg_dump assertion failure with "-n pg_catalog"
In-Reply-To: <ZIvzRTPWILVZ2Z5b@paquier.xyz>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox