Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-31 Thread Stephen Frost
Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 5:47 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > What we need to be doing here is combining the set of components that > > the sequence has been marked with and the set of components that the > > table

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-30 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 5:47 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > What we need to be doing here is combining the set of components that > the sequence has been marked with and the set of components that the > table has been marked with, not trying to figure out if the sequence is > a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-29 Thread Stephen Frost
Michael, (dropping -general, not sure why that list was included...) * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > That'd be great. It's definitely on my list of things to look into, but > > I'm extremely

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-29 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> That'd be great. It's definitely on my list of things to look into, but >> I'm extremely busy this week. I hope to look into it on

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-27 Thread Michael Paquier
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > That'd be great. It's definitely on my list of things to look into, but > I'm extremely busy this week. I hope to look into it on Friday, would > be great to see what you find. Sequences that are directly defined in

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-26 Thread Stephen Frost
Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.] > > > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Stephen, > >

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Noah Misch wrote: > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.] > > 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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dumping extensions having sequences with 9.6beta3

2016-07-26 Thread Noah Misch
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 01:40:01PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Philippe BEAUDOIN wrote: > > I am currently playing with extensions. And I found a strange behaviour > > change with 9.6beta2 and 3 when pg_dumping a database with an extension >