Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > Yep, pretty much that. CLOSE_WAIT is for performance defects, race > conditions, and other defects where a successful fix is difficult to verify > beyond reasonable doubt. Other things can move directly to "resolved". I > don't mind if practice diverges

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 03:23:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Peter Eisentraut > wrote: > > On 6/7/16 11:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> > >> Moved to CLOSE_WAIT. > > > > Could you add an explanation on the wiki page about what

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: > On 6/7/16 11:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >Moved to CLOSE_WAIT. > > Could you add an explanation on the wiki page about what this section means? I understood it to simply be a step on the way to being resolved- that is, everything

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 6/7/16 11:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> >> Moved to CLOSE_WAIT. > > Could you add an explanation on the wiki page about what this section means? Noah created that section. My interpretation is that

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On 6/7/16 11:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: Moved to CLOSE_WAIT. Could you add an explanation on the wiki page about what this section means? -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote: > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Stephen, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a > 9.6 open item,

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > Stephen, are you working on a patch or should I get one out of my > pocket? That's something we should get fixed quickly. We need as well > to be careful with the support for COMMENT with access methods, the > current consensus on

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >>> It seems important to get this fixed. I added it to the open items list. >> >> I added already it as " Access methods created with

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 5:55 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> It seems important to get this fixed. I added it to the open items list. > > I added already it as " Access methods created with extensions are > dumped individually ". That's not specific to bloom. Oh, sorry,

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 12:31:44PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Thom Brown wrote: > > > If a database with the bloom extension installed is dumped and restored, > > > there's an error with

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: Stephen, something is smelling wrong in

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >>> Stephen, something is smelling wrong in checkExtensionMembership() >>> since 5d58999, an access method does not have ACLs and I would have

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> Stephen, something is smelling wrong in checkExtensionMembership() >> since 5d58999, an access method does not have ACLs and I would have >> expected that when this routine is invoked in >> selectDumpableAccessMethod()

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Thom Brown wrote: > > If a database with the bloom extension installed is dumped and restored, > > there's an error with the access method creation: > > > > createdb bloomtest > > psql

Re: [HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Thom Brown wrote: > If a database with the bloom extension installed is dumped and restored, > there's an error with the access method creation: > > createdb bloomtest > psql -c 'CREATE EXTENSION bloom;' bloomtest > pg_dump -d bloomtest >

[HACKERS] Problem with dumping bloom extension

Hi, If a database with the bloom extension installed is dumped and restored, there's an error with the access method creation: createdb bloomtest psql -c 'CREATE EXTENSION bloom;' bloomtest pg_dump -d bloomtest > ~/tmp/bloom.sql createdb bloomtest2 psql -d bloomtest2 -f ~/tmp/bloom.sql The