Re: [9.1] 2 bugs with extensions
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>
From: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-11-02T14:50:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> I think it may be time to bite the bullet and change that (including >> breaking dumpSequence() into two separate functions). I'm a little bit >> worried about the compatibility implications of back-patching such a >> change, though. Is it likely that anybody out there is depending on the >> fact that, eg, pg_dump --section=pre-data currently includes SEQUENCE SET >> items? Personally I think it's more likely that that'd be seen as a >> bug, but ... FWIW, +1 > Specifically, I'm thinking this, which looks rather bulky but most of > the diff is from reindenting the guts of dumpSequence(). I see that you commited that patch, thanks a lot Tom! Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support