Re: Call for pg_dump testing

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Call for pg_dump testing
Date: 2003-12-08 04:03:56
Message-ID: 3FD3F82C.8090603@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> and a dump that orders the two views arbitrarily. We can certainly add
> code to do something different, but are there any real-world cases where
> this is needed? The above example seems more than slightly made-up.
> The views aren't actually functional anyway (trying to use either would
> result in an "infinite recursion" error). Can you show me a non-broken
> situation where pg_dump needs to resort to view shells?

Well then shouldn't we just ban you from creating a view that creates a
circular dependency?

Thinks... How about if the views were using each others 'table type' to
do something? Although you cannot change the return type definition can
you?

Hmmm.

>>Also shouldn't we really separate out the 'can modify catalogs manually'
>>privilege from the 'superuser' privilege?
>
>
> See pg_shadow.usecatupd. This could stand to be better supported maybe
> (like with ALTER USER support)?

Sounds like this should be a TODO...

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-12-08 04:25:57 Re: aggregate + view + alias crash on 7.4 stable
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-12-08 03:43:52 Re: Call for pg_dump testing