Re: BUG #6299: pg_dump, pg_dumpall - Problem with the order of backup functions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lindebg <lindebg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #6299: pg_dump, pg_dumpall - Problem with the order of backup functions
Date: 2011-11-19 15:34:28
Message-ID: 16935.1321716868@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

lindebg <lindebg(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 11/19/2011 12:19 AM, lindebg(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
>>> Thanks, in this case works :-) However, this does not solve all cases.
>>> Unlikely, but possible to create, cyclic case can not be restored:

Color me skeptical. Under what conceivable use-case could you have
functions that were mutually dependent in that way? And actually did
something useful (not recurse till stack overflow) when called?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-11-19 16:20:39 Re: BUG #6301: extra space in psql variable expansion
Previous Message lindebg 2011-11-19 08:24:11 Re: BUG #6299: pg_dump, pg_dumpall - Problem with the order of backup functions