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

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
Date
Msg-id 753dcafc-a648-9041-e9ca-e405cd4498f4@2ndquadrant.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?  (Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>)
Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Jim Nasby <jim.nasby@openscg.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/1/17 08:36, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2/22/17 18:24, Jim Nasby wrote:
>>> 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.
> 
> I wonder whether we should emphasize this change by assigning
> DO_REFRESH_MATVIEW a higher number, like 100?

Since there wasn't any interest in that idea, I have committed Jim's
patch as is.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum andbt_page_items(bytea)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: check failure with -DRELCACHE_FORCE_RELEASE -DCLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY