| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Segmentation fault in pg_dumpall from master down to 9.1 and other bug introduced by RLS |
| Date: | 2014-11-14 05:41:02 |
| Message-ID: | 4271.1415943662@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 08:24:36PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Agreed. I'll take care of both and we'll make sure the new role
>> attributes being added will do the same for upgrades also.
> That would make pg_dumpall less faithful for every role other than the
> bootstrap superuser, a net loss. It would be defensible to do this for
> BOOTSTRAP_SUPERUSERID only.
Huh? It seems difficult to argue that it's "less faithful" to do this
when the previous version didn't have the concept at all.
> Even there I prefer the current behavior; this is
> just another of many fine details that pg_upgrade reproduces more precisely
> than other pg_dumpall/pg_dump invocations.
So far as catalog contents are concerned, pg_upgrade *is* pg_dumpall.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2014-11-14 07:23:46 | Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5) |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-11-14 03:59:09 | Re: Unintended restart after recovery error |