| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ken Tanzer <ken(dot)tanzer(at)gmail(dot)com>, PG-General Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.6 parameters messing up my 9.2 pg_dump/pg_restore |
| Date: | 2017-06-28 20:30:21 |
| Message-ID: | 24806.1498681821@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Ken Tanzer wrote:
>> I didn't see any options for dealing with this, though I'm hoping I'm
>> missing something easy or obvious. Any suggestions or help would be
>> appreciated. Thanks.
> pg_dump doesn't promise that its output is compatible with servers older
> than itself. I'm afraid you're stuck with filtering the output somehow
> to remove or maybe comment out those lines.
Generally speaking, it helps a lot if you don't insist on restoring the
output in a single transaction. In this case, that would allow the
restore to ignore the new parameters and move on.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2017-06-28 20:34:19 | Re: Is the row version available in SQL? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2017-06-28 20:10:02 | Re: 9.6 parameters messing up my 9.2 pg_dump/pg_restore |