On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 3:30 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 10.01.2024 12:31, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > I am slightly hesitant to add any particular system table name in the
> > comments as this can happen for any other system table as well, so
> > slightly adjusted the comments in the attached. However, I think it is
> > okay to mention the particular system table name in the commit
> > message. Let me know what do you think.
>
> Thank you, Amit!
>
> I'd like to note that the culprit is exactly pg_largeobject as coded in
> dumpDatabase():
> /*
> * pg_largeobject comes from the old system intact, so set its
> * relfrozenxids, relminmxids and relfilenode.
> */
> if (dopt->binary_upgrade)
> ...
> appendPQExpBufferStr(loOutQry,
> "TRUNCATE pg_catalog.pg_largeobject;\n");
>
> I see no other TRUNCATEs (or similar logic) around, so I would specify the
> table name in the comments. Though maybe I'm missing something...
>
But tomorrow it could be for other tables and if we change this
TRUNCATE logic for pg_largeobject (of which chances are less) then
there is always a chance that one misses changing this comment. I feel
keeping it generic in this case would be better as the problem is
generic but it is currently shown for pg_largeobject.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
