Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jim Nasby
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
Дата
Msg-id bcad6d9c-ef3c-9668-ff54-9900955a7b6d@openscg.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Change in "policy" on dump ordering?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 3/4/17 11:49 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> 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.

Thanks. Something else that seems somewhat useful would be to have the 
sort defined by an array of the ENUM values in the correct order, and 
then have the code do the mechanical map generation. I'm guessing the 
only reasonable way to make that work would be to have some kind of a 
last item indicator value, so you know how many values were in the ENUM. 
Maybe there's a better way to do that...
-- 
Jim Nasby, Chief Data Architect, OpenSCG



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Jim Nasby
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] objsubid vs subobjid
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0