> > + if (strcmp(te->desc,"CONSTRAINT") == 0 > || > + strcmp(te->desc,"FK > CONSTRAINT") == 0 || > + strcmp(te->desc,"CHECK > CONSTRAINT") == 0 || > + strcmp(te->desc,"TRIGGER") == 0 > || > + > strcmp(slots[i].te->desc,"CONSTRAINT") == 0 || > + strcmp(slots[i].te->desc,"FK > CONSTRAINT") == 0 || > + strcmp(slots[i].te->desc,"CHECK > CONSTRAINT") == 0 || > + > strcmp(slots[i].te->desc,"TRIGGER") == 0) > Really just an observation from the peanut gallery here, but every time pg_restore hard-codes this kind of thing, it introduces yet another possible side-effect bug when someone, eg, adds a new TOC type.
Would it substantially decrease the benefits of the patch to skip *any* toc entry that shares dependencies with another? (rather than just those listed above). -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
