From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Francisco Reyes <lists(at)stringsutils(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, PostgreSQL general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump vs schemas |
Date: | 2007-07-16 19:06:09 |
Message-ID: | 1184612769.16532.15.camel@dogma.ljc.laika.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 14:58 -0400, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> One possible way may be:
> Dump the source schema.
> Remove references to the schema name in the pg_dump file.
> Change search_path and restore schema.
That's what I currently do. It seems a little flimsy though: there are
too many objects to really remove the references by hand, so we do a
global search-and-replace. As long as the schema name is unique enough,
I suppose it's alright for a development (non-production) database.
> > How do other people do that? Is it worth trying to add a way for
> > pg_restore to rename object?
>
> In the particular case that you mentioned, if pg_dump could be made to not
> include the schema name anywhere that should make the process easier.
That's what I was thinking. It might be better placed in pg_restore
though, so that way you can decide after you've already made the backup.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Steve Atkins | 2007-07-16 19:12:30 | Re: What's the logical counterpart of the to_hex function? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-16 19:06:07 | Re: Moved postgres, now won't start |