From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Kirk Wolak <wolakk@gmail.com>
Cc: Imseih (AWS), Sami <simseih@amazon.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] pg_dump does not properly deal with BEGIN ATOMIC function
Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2023 13:41:51 -0400
Message-ID: <3977576.1685900511@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACLU5mQrR0gE8N9911QsoSkrHRr-9SBZQKmtEB-KSt67wOmKJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2C1933AB-C2F8-499B-9D18-4AC1882256A0@amazon.com>
<49272.1685708176@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CACLU5mTMoj8yx-tUFk84S1tfY-byvNVAWvVJ0MqG8Bp5B-wm_A@mail.gmail.com>
<1868.1685816891@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CACLU5mQrR0gE8N9911QsoSkrHRr-9SBZQKmtEB-KSt67wOmKJA@mail.gmail.com>
Kirk Wolak <wolakk@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:28 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'm not really sure which of these I like better. The first one
>> is a much simpler code change, and there is some value in labeling
>> the output like that. The second patch's output seems less cluttered,
>> but it's committing a modularity sin by embedding formatting knowledge
>> at the caller level. Thoughts?
> Honestly the double space in front of the strings with either the Original
> version,
> or the "detail:" version is great.
> While I get the "Less Cluttered" version.. It "detaches" it a bit too much
> from the lead in, for me.
Done with pg_log_warning_detail. I ended up taking out the two spaces,
as that still felt like a modularity violation. Also, although the
extra space looks alright in English, I'm less sure about how it'd
look in another language where "warning:" and "detail:" get translated
to strings of other lengths. So the new output (before 016107478
fixed it) is
pg_dump: warning: could not resolve dependency loop among these items:
pg_dump: detail: FUNCTION a_f (ID 216 OID 40532)
pg_dump: detail: CONSTRAINT a_pkey (ID 3466 OID 40531)
pg_dump: detail: POST-DATA BOUNDARY (ID 3612)
pg_dump: detail: TABLE DATA a (ID 3610 OID 40525)
pg_dump: detail: PRE-DATA BOUNDARY (ID 3611)
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, wolakk@gmail.com, simseih@amazon.com, peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] pg_dump does not properly deal with BEGIN ATOMIC function
In-Reply-To: <3977576.1685900511@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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