From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Jelan" <jelan(at)magelo(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: URGENT: pg_dump & Postgres 7.2b4 |
Date: | 2002-01-10 22:01:37 |
Message-ID: | 22999.1010700097@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Jelan" <jelan(at)magelo(dot)com> writes:
> Dont panic, it was just a stupid try and i had saved the file and then
> restored it ;)
Oh good. In that case see my followup to pghackers. I think your
problem is isolated to the sequence object(s), and can be summarized
as: nextval() will work, pg_dump'ing a sequence will not. So, to get
out of trouble, try this: for each sequence, do nextval() to note the
current value, drop the sequence, recreate it, do setval() to restore
the count. Then you'll be in a state where you can pg_dump. Then try
not to go a million transactions between sequence creations and pg_dumps
while you're using 7.2b4 :-(.
There will be a fix in the next beta version.
Oh, and many thanks for finding this! Would've been embarrassing to
have this glitch escape beta testing...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2002-01-10 22:03:42 | Re: Insert Performance with WAL and Fsync |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-10 21:41:55 | Re: Insert Performance with WAL and Fsync |