Re: [GENERAL] pg-dump problem

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: herouth(at)oumail(dot)openu(dot)ac(dot)il (Herouth Maoz)
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg-dump problem
Date: 1998-08-19 16:42:07
Message-ID: 199808191642.MAA28672@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> At 17:51 +0300 on 19/8/98, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>
> > I believe this was fixed in the coming 6.4 beta, September 1.
>
> Ah, I see... now, where did I put that time machine... :)
>
> Well, I thought I'd do a pg_dump -S and append the normal pg_dump to it.
> Thus, the schema will be created twice, and whatever failed in the first
> pass will work in the second.
>
> The problem with that is that pg_dump -S dumps the indices, so the indices
> will be created before the data copy - which will cause a great slow-down
> upon restoration.

Yep. All the index creation is at the end, so you can just delete them.

>
> > I also believe we now show the load as it is being loaded by default.
> > You can use a psql option to get that in earlier releases.
>
> Which option? I used -e, but it doesn't echo the actual data, only the
> queries themselves, so I had to guess that the line causing the display of
> all slash commands was the "\." at the end of a copy operation.

Oh, you want to see the data? I think the new version does this. Not sure.

--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremy Hansen 1998-08-20 02:36:45 simple auto increment question.
Previous Message Herouth Maoz 1998-08-19 15:35:54 Re: [GENERAL] pg-dump problem