Re: [BUG] pg_dump does not properly deal with BEGIN ATOMIC function

Reminds me to say a *big* *thank you* to everyone involved in and
contributing to Postgres development for making error messages which are so
good. For a programmer, error text is a primary UI. Most Postgres errors
and log messages are clear and sufficient. Even when they're a bit obscure,
they alway seem to be *on topic*, and enough to get you on the right
track.I assume that we've all used programs and operating systems that emit
more....runic...errors.

On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 6:03 PM Morris de Oryx <morrisdeoryx(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> Another suggestion for AWS/RDS: Expose *all of the logs in the upgrade
> tool chain*. If I'd had all of the logs at the start of this, I'd have
> been able to track down the issue myself quite quickly. Setting up that
> simple case database took me less than an hour today. Without the logs,
> it's been impossible (until the RDS patch a month ago) and difficult (now)
> to get a sense of what's happening.
>
> Thank you
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 5:19 PM Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 1:41 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>>> Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> .. to strings of other lengths. So the new output (before 016107478
>>> fixed it) is
>>>
>>> pg_dump: warning: could not resolve dependency loop among these items:
>>> pg_dump: detail: FUNCTION a_f (ID 216 OID 40532)
>>> pg_dump: detail: CONSTRAINT a_pkey (ID 3466 OID 40531)
>>> pg_dump: detail: POST-DATA BOUNDARY (ID 3612)
>>> pg_dump: detail: TABLE DATA a (ID 3610 OID 40525)
>>> pg_dump: detail: PRE-DATA BOUNDARY (ID 3611)
>>>
>>> regards, tom lane
>>>
>> +1
>>
>