From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
Subject: | Re: 8.0.0 pg_restore -L doesn't restore ACLs |
Date: | 2005-01-23 03:54:12 |
Message-ID: | 20050123035412.GA93052@winnie.fuhr.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 07:19:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> > PostgreSQL 8.0.0
> > Running "pg_restore -l" to create a list file and then restoring
> > using "pg_restore -L" fails to restore ACLs. See the "Privileges
> > where [sic] not restored" thread in pgsql-admin:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-admin/2005-01/msg00197.php
>
> No doubt this is because the -l option doesn't list ACL entries in the
> first place :-(.
Right, but it did in 7.4.6. I'm not sure if you're saying, "It
doesn't but it used to" or "It doesn't and it never did."
If I dump a 7.4.6 database with pg_dump 7.4.6 and do a pg_restore -l
with pg_restore 7.4.6, I get the following:
;
; Archive created at Sat Jan 22 20:40:14 2005
; dbname: testdb
; TOC Entries: 7
; Compression: -1
; Dump Version: 1.7-0
; Format: CUSTOM
; Integer: 4 bytes
; Offset: 8 bytes
;
;
; Selected TOC Entries:
;
4; 2200 ACL public pgsql
5; 2561677 TABLE foo mfuhr
6; 2561677 ACL foo mfuhr
7; 2561677 TABLE DATA foo mfuhr
3; 2200 COMMENT SCHEMA public pgsql
If I use pg_restore 8.0.0 on the same file, I get this instead:
;
; Archive created at Sat Jan 22 20:40:14 2005
; dbname: testdb
; TOC Entries: 7
; Compression: -1
; Dump Version: 1.7-0
; Format: CUSTOM
; Integer: 4 bytes
; Offset: 8 bytes
;
;
; Selected TOC Entries:
;
5; 0 2561677 TABLE public foo mfuhr
7; 0 2561677 TABLE DATA public foo mfuhr
3; 0 2200 COMMENT - SCHEMA public pgsql
--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yary Hluchan | 2005-01-23 08:57:07 | BUG #1435: Optimizer not using index on large tables when inner joining two views |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-23 02:27:50 | Re: BUG #1409: A good and a bad news: Crazy SQL JOIN? |