Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user
Дата
Msg-id CANP8+jKBYXuJ=fpu-ZHUJ_KRg1UomQip=Uev-Yga2GkC-MHPPA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Ответы Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 7 May 2016 at 16:21, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
* Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote:
> On 7 May 2016 at 16:14, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > > If we don't lock it then we will have a inconsistent dump that will fail
> > > later, if dumped while an object is being dropped.
> > > Do we want an inconsistent dump?
> >
> > The dump won't be inconsistent, as Tom pointed out.  The catalog tables
> > are read using a repeatable read transaction, which will be consistent.
>
> The scan is consistent, yes, but the results would not be.

I'm not following- the results are entirely dependent on the scan, so if
the scan is consistent, how could the results not be?

Objects would no longer exist because of concurrent DROPs.

You agreed before, why did you change? 

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

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user
Следующее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_dump broken for non-super user