Re: pg_dump not including custom CAST?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>
Cc: "D(dot) Dante Lorenso" <dante(at)lorenso(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump not including custom CAST?
Date: 2007-11-17 16:01:27
Message-ID: 17086.1195315287@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> writes:
> On Nov 17, 2007, at 0:36 , Tom Lane wrote:
>> pg_dump thinks it's a built-in system object.

> What other objects might be susceptible to this? Operators? Operator
> classes?

It's just casts. They're a bit of a problem since they have neither
owners nor schemas, so there's not anything very concrete to base a
dump-or-don't-dump decision on. The rule pg_dump uses is to dump it
if at least one of the three underlying objects (source type, dest type,
or function) is dumpable. Here you've got 2 builtin types and
no function, so you lose.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shane Ambler 2007-11-17 16:37:03 Re: Need help with complicated SQL statement
Previous Message Michael Glaesemann 2007-11-17 15:50:05 Re: Qeury a boolean column?(using postgresql & EJB)