| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com>, oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [PATCHES] pg_dump primary keys |
| Date: | 1999-12-12 02:06:49 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.20.9912120121530.6044-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1999-12-11, Tom Lane mentioned:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> What though if a function accesses a table? Which one goes first? Do we
> >> have to maintain a network of dependencies in pg_dump? Eventually we'll
> >> probably have to, with all the foreign key stuff coming up. Gloomy
> >> prospects.
>
> Couldn't we solve this by the simple expedient of dumping all the
> objects in the database in OID order?
Wow, great idea! That might actually solve all (well, most) pg_dump
related problems once and for all. Of course how you get all objects in
the database in oid order is to be determined.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-12-12 05:39:31 | Re: Jesus, what have I done (was: LONG) |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-12-12 01:33:08 | Jesus, what have I done (was: LONG) |