Thank you for your quick reply (my first post/bug report).
When changeing my database partly to partitions, I introduced two =
schemas to separate current and archive data.
According to Postgres DOC chapter 5.8.3 it is generally not advisable to =
use schema qualified names for any objects but to use search_path =
instead.
In my opinion this encouraged naming of objects without explicit schema =
is semantically part of the application (e.g. functions) even when not =
written by words.
When setting the search_path altered for the database it becomes =
semantically a part of the database and the application. This implies it =
should be dumped with the content of the database to preserve the =
consistency of the application.
The same applies to cases with only one schema with no standard name =
(when public becomes myapplication).
My point is the logical consistency of what consists a database and how =
to transport all information in one container (a dump).
Even the syntax (ALTER DATABASE xxxdb SET SEARCH PATH) suggests this to =
be part of the database and not of a session or the cluster.
These are my 2 cents as being relatively new to PostgreSQL.
Thanks
Hans Buschmann