From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | Nikhil Sontakke <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: pg_dump: schema with OID XXXXX does not exist - was Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers |
Date: | 2011-11-11 19:21:31 |
Message-ID: | 1321039140-sup-4806@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Daniel Farina's message of vie nov 11 16:08:01 -0300 2011:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Nikhil Sontakke <nikkhils(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >>
> >> But if it's deemed to be a
> >> problem, I want to see a solution that's actually watertight.)
> >>
> >
> > After Daniel's hunch about pg_dump barfing due to such leftover entries
> > proving out to be true, we have one credible explanation (there might be
> > other reasons too) for this long standing issue. I see some reports from as
> > early as 2004 and some as latest as Feb, 2011!
>
> The 2004 report was in version 7.3, released in 2002. So it's Very
> Nearly a ten year old bug, and may very well go back further back in
> time.
Wasn't 7.3 the release that introduced schemas in the first place? I
wonder if there's any other kind of "container" sort of object that
could present a similar problem, in releases prior to that.
If we delay fixing it for 16 more days, it would last nine years.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-11-11 19:21:39 | Re: why do we need two snapshots per query? |
Previous Message | Daniel Farina | 2011-11-11 19:08:01 | Re: pg_dump: schema with OID XXXXX does not exist - was Concurrent CREATE TABLE/DROP SCHEMA leaves inconsistent leftovers |