On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Sorry for not paying attention sooner. After studying it for awhile,
>>> I think the change is probably all right but your proposed comment is
>>> entirely inadequate.
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sorry for not paying attention sooner. After studying it for awhile,
>> I think the change is probably all right but your proposed comment is
>> entirely inadequate.
> If you don't like that version, can you suggest some
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> If there are no comments on this soon-ish, I'm going to push and
>> back-patched the patch I attached.
>
> Sorry for not paying attention sooner. After studying it for awhile,
> I think the change is probably all right bu
Robert Haas writes:
> If there are no comments on this soon-ish, I'm going to push and
> back-patched the patch I attached.
Sorry for not paying attention sooner. After studying it for awhile,
I think the change is probably all right but your proposed comment is
entirely inadequate. There are e
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> This can lead to deadlocks during parallel restore. Test case:
>
> create table bar (a int primary key, b int);
> create table baz (z int, a int references bar);
> create view foo as select a, b, sum(1) from bar group by a union all
> select
This can lead to deadlocks during parallel restore. Test case:
create table bar (a int primary key, b int);
create table baz (z int, a int references bar);
create view foo as select a, b, sum(1) from bar group by a union all
select z, a, 0 from baz;
I dumped this with: pg_dump -Fc -s -f test.dmp
