Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Michael Paquier writes: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Martín Marqués > wrote: >> This is v4 of the patch, which is actually a cleaner version from the >> v2 one Michael sent. > Let's do as you suggest then, and just focus on the schema

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-30 2:02 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Martín Marqués > wrote: >> This is v4 of the patch, which is actually a cleaner version from the >> v2 one Michael sent. >> >> I stripped off the external index

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:43 AM, Martín Marqués wrote: > This is v4 of the patch, which is actually a cleaner version from the > v2 one Michael sent. > > I stripped off the external index created from the tests as that index > shouldn't be dumped (table it belongs to isn't

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Hi, This is v4 of the patch, which is actually a cleaner version from the v2 one Michael sent. I stripped off the external index created from the tests as that index shouldn't be dumped (table it belongs to isn't dumped, so neither should the index). I also took off a test which was duplicated.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-29 4:51 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : > >> I see the current behavior is documented, and I do understand why global >> objects can't be part of the extension, but for indexes it seems to violate >> POLA a bit. >> >> Is there a reason why we don't want the

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 08/27/2016 12:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> =?UTF-8?B?TWFydMOtbiBNYXJxdcOpcw==?= writes: >>> Looking at this issue today, I found that we are not setting a >>> dependency for an index

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-26 19:37 GMT-03:00 Tom Lane : > =?UTF-8?B?TWFydMOtbiBNYXJxdcOpcw==?= writes: >> Looking at this issue today, I found that we are not setting a >> dependency for an index created inside an extension. > > Surely the index has a dependency on a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On 08/26/2016 04:15 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: On 08/27/2016 12:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote: =?UTF-8?B?TWFydMOtbiBNYXJxdcOpcw==?= writes: Looking at this issue today, I found that we are not setting a dependency for an index created inside an extension. Surely the index has a

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Tomas Vondra writes: > On 08/27/2016 12:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> If you mean that you want an extension to create an index on a table >> that doesn't belong to it, but it's assuming pre-exists, I think >> that's just stupid and we need not support it. > I don't see

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On 08/27/2016 12:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote: =?UTF-8?B?TWFydMOtbiBNYXJxdcOpcw==?= writes: Looking at this issue today, I found that we are not setting a dependency for an index created inside an extension. Surely the index has a dependency on a table, which depends on the

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

=?UTF-8?B?TWFydMOtbiBNYXJxdcOpcw==?= writes: > Looking at this issue today, I found that we are not setting a > dependency for an index created inside an extension. Surely the index has a dependency on a table, which depends on the extension? If you mean that you want an

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Hi, 2016-08-26 10:53 GMT-03:00 Martín Marqués : > > There's still one issue, which I'll add a test for as well, which is > that if the index was created by the extension, it will be dumped > anyway. I'll have a look at that as well. Looking at this issue today, I found

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Hi, 2016-08-25 8:10 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Martín Marqués > wrote: >> 2016-08-24 21:34 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : >>> >>> Yes, you are right. If I look at the diffs this

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Martín Marqués wrote: > 2016-08-24 21:34 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : >> >> Yes, you are right. If I look at the diffs this morning I am seeing >> the ACLs being dumped for this aggregate. So we could just fix the

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-24 21:34 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : > > Yes, you are right. If I look at the diffs this morning I am seeing > the ACLs being dumped for this aggregate. So we could just fix the > test and be done with it. I did not imagine the index issue though, > and this is

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:15 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> The patch attached includes all those tests and they are failing. We >> are going to need a patch able to pass all that, and even for master >> this is going to

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-24 17:01 GMT-03:00 Martín Marqués : > 2016-08-24 11:15 GMT-03:00 Stephen Frost : >> Michael, >> >> * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >>> The patch attached includes all those tests and they are failing. We >>> are going to need

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

2016-08-24 11:15 GMT-03:00 Stephen Frost : > Michael, > > * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: >> The patch attached includes all those tests and they are failing. We >> are going to need a patch able to pass all that, and even for master >> this is going to

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Michael, * Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote: > The patch attached includes all those tests and they are failing. We > are going to need a patch able to pass all that, and even for master > this is going to need more thoughts, and let's focus on HEAD/9.6 > first. Are you sure you

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Martín Marqués > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> 2016-08-23 16:46 GMT-03:00 Martín Marqués : >>> >>> I will add tests for sequence and

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Martín Marqués wrote: > Hi, > > 2016-08-23 16:46 GMT-03:00 Martín Marqués : >> >> I will add tests for sequence and functions as you mention and test again. >> >> Then I'll check if other tests should be added as

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On 8/23/16 3:34 PM, Martín Marqués wrote: I found quite some other objects we should be checking as well, but this will add some duplication to the tests, as I'd just copy (with minor changes) what's in src/bin/pg_dump/t/002_pg_dump.pl I can't think of a way to avoid this duplication, not that

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Hi, 2016-08-23 16:46 GMT-03:00 Martín Marqués : > > I will add tests for sequence and functions as you mention and test again. > > Then I'll check if other tests should be added as well. I found quite some other objects we should be checking as well, but this will add

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

Hi Michael, 2016-08-23 5:02 GMT-03:00 Michael Paquier : > On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Martín Marqués > wrote: >> I believe the fix will be simple after the back and forth mails with >> Michael, Stephen and Tom. I will work on that later,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump with tables created in schemas created by extensions

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Martín Marqués wrote: > I believe the fix will be simple after the back and forth mails with > Michael, Stephen and Tom. I will work on that later, but preferred to > have the tests the show the problem which will also make testing the fix