Re: Change in "policy" on dump ordering?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
Date: 2017-02-21 22:25:59
Message-ID: 8f64786e-824d-7c0d-33a6-3d9e1c8e9fde@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/21/17 14:58, Jim Nasby wrote:
> AFAICT in older versions only object types that absolutely had to wait
> for DO_POST_DATA_BOUNDARY would do so. More recently though, objects are
> being added after that (presumably because it's easier than renumbering
> everything in dbObjectTypePriority).

Is there any specific assignment that you have concerns about?

> Is this change a good or bad idea? Should there be an official guide for
> where new things go?

The comment above dbObjectTypePriority explains it, doesn't it?

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-02-21 22:36:21 Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm.
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-02-21 22:22:22 Re: mat views stats