Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?

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