Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
Date
Msg-id 65049c27-96bf-317b-b435-931f6041f94c@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2/22/17 12:29 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2/22/17 10:14, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW tmv AS SELECT * FROM pg_subscription;
>> SELECT 0
>>
>> IOW, you can create matviews that depend on any other
>> table/view/matview, but right now if the matview includes certain items
>> it will mysteriously end up empty post-restore.
>
> Yes, by that logic matview refresh should always be last.

Patches for head attached.

RLS was the first item added after DO_REFRESH_MATVIEW, which was added 
in 9.5. So if we want to treat this as a bug, they'd need to be patched 
as well, which is a simple matter of swapping 33 and 34.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pritam Baral
Date:
Subject: [HACKERS] Index usage for elem-contained-by-const-range clauses
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?