| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Very vague pg_dump question ... |
| Date: | 2005-07-08 23:19:39 |
| Message-ID: | 29040.1120864779@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"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?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-07-08 23:29:18 | Re: Very vague pg_dump question ... |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-07-08 23:05:01 | Very vague pg_dump question ... |