Re: pg_upgade vs config

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: pg_upgade vs config
Дата
Msg-id 30432.1475432041@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_upgade vs config  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 10/02/2016 01:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Because pg_dump with --binary-upgrade neglects to emit
>> ALTER EXTENSION bloom ADD ACCESS METHOD bloom;
>> which it would need to do in order to make this work right.  The other
>> small problem is that there is no such ALTER EXTENSION syntax in the
>> backend.  This is a rather major oversight in the patch that added DDL
>> support for access methods, if you ask me.

> I agree.

Remarkably enough, it seems that only a gram.y production need be added
--- the only other code involved is objectaddress.c, which does seem
to have gotten extended sufficiently.
        regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_upgade vs config
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_upgade vs config