Re: pg_dump error

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "mike" <matrix(at)quadrent(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Subject: Re: pg_dump error
Date: 2001-04-17 15:57:45
Message-ID: 23956.987523065@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"mike" <matrix(at)quadrent(dot)net> writes:
> dumpSequence(pilgram_en_id_seq): different sequence name returned by SELECT=
> : pilgram_cross_id_seq

> I'm not sure what this means, and I have no idea how to corect it.

Looking at the source code, it would seem that pg_dump is unhappy
because "SELECT sequence_name FROM pilgram_en_id_seq" returned
"pilgram_cross_id_seq" instead of the expected "pilgram_en_id_seq".

I'm not sure why exactly pg_dump is bothering to make such a
cross-check, but probably the more interesting question is how the
sequence got that way. Did you rename it at some point?

I find that "ALTER TABLE RENAME" will work without complaint on a
sequence. Seems we should either
(a) prohibit renaming a sequence;
(b) improve ALTER TABLE RENAME to know about changing the
sequence_name field as well;
(c) remove this cross-check from pg_dump; and/or
(d) remove the sequence_name field from sequences entirely.

(c) looks like the path of least resistance. I don't like (d) because
of the risk of breaking existing application code that might look at
the contents of sequences. Comments?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message will trillich 2001-04-17 16:01:41 Re: bpchar type
Previous Message Matthew 2001-04-17 15:42:43 RE: failed sanity check, table answers was not found