From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Materialized View patch broke pg_dump |
Date: | 2013-03-11 14:43:15 |
Message-ID: | 513DED83.3020600@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/06/2013 10:55 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> wrote:
>
>> Looking into this issue, it seems the version check in getTables() of pg_dump.c
>> is wrong. Shouldn't the check be
>>
>> if (fout->remoteVersion >= 90300)
>> {
>>
>> }
>>
>> since this is where pg_relation_is_scannable() is introduced?
> Fixed.
>
> Thanks for the report!
>
>
I noticed this morning that I am still getting failures on 9.0, 9.1 and
9.2 which cause my cross-version upgrade testing to fail for git tip.
For all I know this might apply to all back branches, but these are the
only ones tested for upgrade, so that's all I can report on reliably.
I'm chasing it up to find out exactly what's going on, but figured some
extra eyeballs would help.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | MMK | 2013-03-11 14:48:00 | Breaking news |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-03-11 13:56:57 | Re: postgres_fdw vs data formatting GUCs (was Re: [v9.3] writable foreign tables) |