From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: depesz@depesz.com
cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>,
        pgsql-general <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Can we get rid of repeated queries from pg_dump?
In-reply-to: <20210830144551.GA27054@depesz.com>
References: <20210826084430.GA26282@depesz.com>
 <648517.1629986527@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20210826140827.GA15868@depesz.com>
 <649446.1629987629@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20210826160644.GA3120@depesz.com>
 <e6a7503afd115d111fbb96c5787906d73cfe2605.camel@cybertec.at>
 <896732.1630099403@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20210830074442.GB15241@depesz.com>
 <1349119.1630332682@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20210830144551.GA27054@depesz.com>
Comments: In-reply-to hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com>
	message dated "Mon, 30 Aug 2021 16:45:51 +0200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <1351363.1630335487.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 10:58:07 -0400
Message-ID: <1351364.1630335487@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1351364.1630335487%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz@depesz.com> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:11:22AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I speculate that it is collecting and then not printing the info
>> about functions that are in extensions --- can you check on
>> how many there are of those?

>          classid         =E2=94=82 count =

> =E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=
=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=
=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=
=80=E2=94=BC=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80=E2=94=80
>  pg_type                 =E2=94=82    31
>  pg_proc                 =E2=94=82  1729
>  pg_class                =E2=94=82    61
>  pg_foreign_data_wrapper =E2=94=82     1
>  pg_cast                 =E2=94=82    30
>  pg_language             =E2=94=82     1
>  pg_opclass              =E2=94=82    73
>  pg_operator             =E2=94=82   111
>  pg_opfamily             =E2=94=82    73
> (9 rows)

Ah-hah.  Those 1729 extension-owned functions account nicely
for the extra probes into pg_proc, and I bet they are causing
the unexplained getFormattedTypeName calls too.  So the
*real* problem here seems to be that we're doing too much
work on objects that are not going to be dumped because they
are extension members.  I'll take a look at that later if
nobody beats me to it.

			regards, tom lane