Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 15:45:03 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com>,
	jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
	Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
	Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
	Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>,
	Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
	alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org
Subject: Re: Statistics Import and Export
Message-ID: <Z3MGT8TcCOw4U3H0@momjian.us>
References: <ZzuZzDMxe3ClqAgF@momjian.us>
 <CADkLM=cxNaU3O40Y5zGARJBWm-uAvb2hvgZxd=tOu-zTsrHpkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5d3a24216d15ce8a50d0fc085a13a410202014ca.camel@j-davis.com>
 <CADkLM=fcAneLoFrd41zdxm_1mMZz+wTp5gLJ=Av5JtBi5cBnDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c2bc08dfec336c03f7a7165d1347e2b52cf98b17.camel@j-davis.com>
 <CADkLM=fyJ-Y-DNk1aW09btZYdXDXS79xT8oFPTQ6sspWHaqdog@mail.gmail.com>
 <3bd40d2c686608196b8e04c2aaac9c57c447aae6.camel@j-davis.com>
 <CADkLM=cWc+Zbjnpew9sg346DdRQJj8OSvZjg4fwvpLH10EViJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <Z22mcdRo_jTcA7nb@momjian.us>
 <39770e3aebfdf543fa2215fb300621a54b1b2634.camel@j-davis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <39770e3aebfdf543fa2215fb300621a54b1b2634.camel@j-davis.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Z3MGT8TcCOw4U3H0%40momjian.us>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 12:02:47PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-12-26 at 13:54 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I am _again_ not happy with this part of the patch.  Please reply to
> > the
> > criticism in my November 19th email:
> > 
> >         
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/Zz0T1BENIFDnXmwf@momjian.us
> > 
> > rather than ignoring it and posting the same version of the patch.
> 
> I suggest that we make a new thread about the vacuumdb changes and
> focus this thread and patch series on the pg_dump changes (and minor
> flag adjustments to pg_upgrade).
> 
> Unless you think that the pg_dump changes should block on the vacuumdb
> changes? In which case please let me know because the pg_dump changes
> are otherwise close to commit.

I think that is a good idea.  I don't see vacuumdb blocking this.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.