From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Very vague pg_dump question ... |
Date: | 2005-07-09 00:29:06 |
Message-ID: | 20050708212809.F940@ganymede.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> I'm currently looking into a problem that a client is reporting that
>> pg_dump from 8.0.3 is 'skipping' one of their sequences ... I'm waiting
>> for more info, but am curious if anyone knows (or can think of?) any
>> reason why this might happen? The only thing I can think of is that the
>> sequence is owned by someone other then who the database is being dump'd
>> as, and has no permissions to 'read' it ... but anything I'm not thinking
>> of?
>
> AFAIK, a permissions problem would result in a pretty obvious error
> message from pg_dump ... though it's certainly possible for someone
> to ignore that, especially if they are running pg_dump noninteractively.
>
> Skipping in what sense --- no DDL, no setval, both? Is this a
> separately created sequence or a SERIAL sequence?
This is what I'm still looking to find out ... all I got was "the sequence
isn't being recreated in the dump", and when I message the client back, I
get a vacation message, so obviously it wasn't a critical bug for them
*roll eyes*
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-07-09 08:09:36 | Re: Must be owner to truncate? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-07-08 23:29:18 | Re: Very vague pg_dump question ... |