Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 01/08/2016 01:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> No, it's just a bug. Although apparently not many people do that, or >> we'd have heard complaints before. > That dredged up a memory from way back: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/200411251906.43881.aklaver@xxxxxxxxxxx > in particular: > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20077.1101510670@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Well, that was a long time ago. Now that we have extensions, it should be possible for pg_dump to do the right thing with an extension's members whether they're in pg_catalog or not. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
