On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At 22:26 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Now that you mention it, is it a feature at all? Or a bug? ISTM poor
> >> form for a data-only restore to assume it may turn off all pre-existing
> >> triggers.
>
>
At 22:40 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>For now, I'd be happy if the normal case of a simple restore doesn't
>generate warnings.
I'll commit the changes shortly.
>Improving on that probably takes more thought and
>risk than we should be putting in at the end of beta.
Agreed.
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > At 21:37 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> ... we could go back to the old model of only updating
> >>> pg_class in a data-only dump/restore.
> >>
> >> Works for
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 22:26 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Now that you mention it, is it a feature at all? Or a bug? ISTM poor
>> form for a data-only restore to assume it may turn off all pre-existing
>> triggers.
> Do you recall any of the history - why was it add
At 22:26 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Should we have an option to turn off this feature entirely?
>
>Now that you mention it, is it a feature at all? Or a bug? ISTM poor
>form for a data-only restore to assume it may turn off all pre-existing
>triggers.
Do you recall any of the history -
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 21:37 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> ... we could go back to the old model of only updating
>>> pg_class in a data-only dump/restore.
>>
>> Works for me ...
> Should we have an option to turn off this
At 21:37 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> ... we could go back to the old model of only updating
>> pg_class in a data-only dump/restore.
>
>Works for me ...
>
Should we have an option to turn off this feature entirely?
--
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... we could go back to the old model of only updating
> pg_class in a data-only dump/restore.
Works for me ...
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and uns
At 20:00 5/03/01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>I suppose this is only a cosmetic issue, but we're going to get
>questions/complaints about it... is there any way to avoid needing
>those UPDATEs?
I definitely prefer it to match the old behaviour, and since by default we
put triggers at the end, we could
