Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id 26447.1529426272@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-06-19 12:17:56 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The hard part here is how exactly are we going to represent the default
>> value.  AFAICS, the only thing that pg_dump could readily lay its hands
>> on is the "anyarray" textual representation of attmissingval, which maybe
>> is okay but it means more work for the support function.

> Isn't that just a few lines of code?

Not sure; I've not thought about how to code it.

> And if the default value bugs us,
> we can easily add a support function that dumps the value without the
> anyarray adornment?

The problem here is that that function does not exist in 11beta1.
Since adding the "incoming" function is certainly going to require
initdb, we have to be able to dump from the server as it now stands,
or we'll be cutting existing beta testers adrift.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL prefetch