On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 3:30 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 10.01.2024 12:31, Amit Kapila wrote: > > I am slightly hesitant to add any particular system table name in the > > comments as this can happen for any other system table as well, so > > slightly adjusted the comments in the attached. However, I think it is > > okay to mention the particular system table name in the commit > > message. Let me know what do you think. > > Thank you, Amit! > > I'd like to note that the culprit is exactly pg_largeobject as coded in > dumpDatabase(): > /* > * pg_largeobject comes from the old system intact, so set its > * relfrozenxids, relminmxids and relfilenode. > */ > if (dopt->binary_upgrade) > ... > appendPQExpBufferStr(loOutQry, > "TRUNCATE pg_catalog.pg_largeobject;\n"); > > I see no other TRUNCATEs (or similar logic) around, so I would specify the > table name in the comments. Though maybe I'm missing something... >
But tomorrow it could be for other tables and if we change this TRUNCATE logic for pg_largeobject (of which chances are less) then there is always a chance that one misses changing this comment. I feel keeping it generic in this case would be better as the problem is generic but it is currently shown for pg_largeobject. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
