Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, otoh, already did break pg_dump,
>> and we had to hack things to fix it; see commit
>> 683abc73dff549e94555d4020dae8d02f32ed78b.
> Well pg_dump was only broken in that there was a new catalog state to
> deal with. But the commit you linked to was fixing pg_upgrade which
> was broken because the on-disk schema was then out of sync with what
> pg_dump would generate.
No, it was fixing cases that would cause problems with or without
pg_upgrade. Arguably that patch made it worse for pg_upgrade, which
needed a followon patch (203d8ae2d).
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
