From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_dump vs. TRANSFORMs
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 09:21:16 -0500
Message-ID: <20161208142116.GC23417@tamriel.snowman.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <729.1481151371@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20160504183952.GE10850@tamriel.snowman.net>
<20161207200915.GZ23417@tamriel.snowman.net>
<729.1481151371@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > As pointed out by Peter E, this also impacts CASTs. Attached is a patch
> > which addresses both by simply also pulling any functions which are
> > referenced from pg_cast or pg_transform when they have OIDs at or after
> > FirstNormalObjectId. I also modified dumpCast() and dumpTransform() to
> > complain loudly if they're unable to dump out the cast or transform due
> > to not finding the function definition(s) necessary.
>
> Please do not hack the already-overcomplicated query in getFuncs without
> bothering to adjust the long comment that describes what it's doing.
Right, just wanted to make sure no one had issue with this approach.
> I have a vague feeling that the code for dumping casts and/or transforms
> may have some assumptions that the underlying function is also being
> dumped. Although maybe the assumption was really only what's fixed here,
> ie that there be a DumpableObject for the function. Anyway, take a close
> look for that.
I'll look around and see, though my hunch is that, at some point, we
were just pulling all functions and then an optimization was added to
exclude pg_catalog and no one noticed that it broke casts using built-in
functions.
> Looks reasonable otherwise.
Ok, great, I'll get to work on building and testing all supported
versions of pg_dump vs. all server versions that I can reasonably get to
build on my current laptop, which I expect to be a matrix of 9.2-master
pg_dump against server versions ~7.4-master...
Thanks!
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 818B) 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-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: sfrost@snowman.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: pg_dump vs. TRANSFORMs
In-Reply-To: <20161208142116.GC23417@tamriel.snowman.net>
* 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