Re: [GENERAL] v9.3.0: bug with pgdump -s?
On 2013-09-15 15:24:57 -0400, Eric B. Ridge wrote: > On 09/15/2013 02:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > >What did you actually try to find out? Greetings, Andres Freund > > I was just trying to mentally sync up > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/xindex.html with (more) concrete > examples. Investigating pg_catalog seemed like the obvious choice. Too > bad. Try looking at contrib/btree_gist or such. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] v9.3.0: bug with pgdump -s?
On 09/15/2013 02:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote: What did you actually try to find out? Greetings, Andres Freund I was just trying to mentally sync up http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/static/xindex.html with (more) concrete examples. Investigating pg_catalog seemed like the obvious choice. Too bad. eric PROPRIETARY AND COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS The information contained in this communication is intended only for the use of the addressee. Any other use is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender if you have received this message in error. This communication is protected by applicable legal privileges and is company confidential. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Re: [GENERAL] v9.3.0: bug with pgdump -s?
On 2013-09-15 12:01:29 -0400, Eric B. Ridge wrote: > Am I expecting too much against 'pg_catalog' or is something bugged? Yes, I think you do expect too much. It'd perhaps be nice to give a nicer error message, but some of the stuff (like the pseudotypes you see warnings about here) doesn't fully follow the public rules. The likely reason you're seing the problem with the opclasses being output incompletely is that internal entries don't all have full dependency information. What did you actually try to find out? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
[GENERAL] v9.3.0: bug with pgdump -s?
(Using the new PostgreSQL v9.3.0) I did a schema-only dump of the 'pg_catalog' schema in the hopes to study how the built-in OPERATOR CLASSes are defined. Doing so output a few warnings: $ [pg930] pg_dump -s -n pg_catalog template1 > /tmp/pg_catalog.sql pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "any" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "anyarray" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "anyelement" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "anyenum" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "anynonarray" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "anyrange" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "cstring" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "event_trigger" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "fdw_handler" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "internal" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "language_handler" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "opaque" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "record" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "trigger" appears to be invalid pg_dump: WARNING: typtype of data type "void" appears to be invalid Additionally, the operator classes seem to be incomplete in pg_dump's output: CREATE OPERATOR CLASS box_ops DEFAULT FOR TYPE box USING gist AS ; ... CREATE OPERATOR CLASS text_ops DEFAULT FOR TYPE text USING btree AS ; I'd expect them to be fully spec'd with OPERATOR, FUNCTION, and STORAGE arguments. Am I expecting too much against 'pg_catalog' or is something bugged? eric PROPRIETARY AND COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS The information contained in this communication is intended only for the use of the addressee. Any other use is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender if you have received this message in error. This communication is protected by applicable legal privileges and is company confidential. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
