Hi, On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 02:49:36PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > 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.
Would this be a candidate for backpatching, or is the behaviour change in pg_dump trumping the issues it solves? Michael -- Michael Banck Projektleiter / Senior Berater Tel.: +49 2166 9901-171 Fax: +49 2166 9901-100 Email: michael.ba...@credativ.de credativ GmbH, HRB Mönchengladbach 12080 USt-ID-Nummer: DE204566209 Trompeterallee 108, 41189 Mönchengladbach Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Meskes, Jörg Folz, Sascha Heuer -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
