Re: pg_upgade vs config - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: pg_upgade vs config
Date
Msg-id 1795ade5-ce00-5521-b024-c0a622f6871f@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgade vs config  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg_upgade vs config
List pgsql-hackers

On 10/02/2016 01:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So then why are the pre-upgrade and post-upgrade dumps different?
> Because pg_dump with --binary-upgrade neglects to emit
>
> ALTER EXTENSION bloom ADD ACCESS METHOD bloom;

That's what I suspected.

>
> which it would need to do in order to make this work right.  The other
> small problem is that there is no such ALTER EXTENSION syntax in the
> backend.  This is a rather major oversight in the patch that added DDL
> support for access methods, if you ask me.


I agree.

cheers

andrew




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgade vs config
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgade vs config