On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Rushabh Lathia < > rushabh.lat...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > rushabh@rushabh-centos-vm:dump_test$ cat dump_test--1.0.sql > > > /* dump_test/dump_test--1.0.sql */ > > Hm. I think it would be a good idea to collect these extension files > somewhere so that pg_dump hacking can be tested with them. Right now, > the extension part of pg_dump is easy to break in subtle ways, which > discourages anyone who wants to meddle with it. > > Maybe something in src/test/modules could keep these files so that > pg_dump can be tested. Is anybody interested in doing that? > For the patch to fix data dump of extensions that contain tables with FK I have implemented a test case in src/test/modules as I didn't want to look at postgis stuff to reproduce the failure, last version is here: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/cab7npqqrjhhmnmcgb0ecvz2ptmncmfd+1htlooxrqjmzgts...@mail.gmail.com > Btw, perhaps you may have noticed, but I marked this patch as rejected... > I > > don't think it makes much sense to put restrictions in this code path > after > > finding my way through all the stuff of pg_dump. > > Please don't do that -- I mean don't use the commitfest app as the only > source for random bits of data. If you want to reject a patch, please > make sure to point that out in the email thread. It's impossible to go > from email archives to commitfest entries. > Sure. Sorry for that... -- Michael
