From: | Alban Hertroys <alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | andrew(at)supernews(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_restore 7.4.7 locks itself out |
Date: | 2006-04-11 10:08:41 |
Message-ID: | 443B8029.1090001@magproductions.nl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew - Supernews wrote:
> On 2006-04-10, Alban Hertroys <alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl> wrote:
> Notice the "INSERT" there. For a restore, you'd expect it to be "COPY",
> _unless_ you used the -d option to pg_dump (this is a common mistake to
> make, given that all the other utilities use -d to specify the database
> name).
That explains a lot, thanks. Looking at my command history, it does
indeed include "-d <database name>".
I was wondering why it was waiting on an insert, would never have
guessed that my dump was made that way... It also explains why I was
seeing locks this way.
This must be a very common mistake, isn't there some way to prevent this
from happening in the future?
> Restoring an inserts dump is _SLOW_ to the point of being glacial, because
Yeah, I know. Luckily that restore turned out to have finished this
morning, so everything is alright. I don't need this dump for restoring
anything serious, luckily.
Regards,
--
Alban Hertroys
alban(at)magproductions(dot)nl
magproductions b.v.
T: ++31(0)534346874
F: ++31(0)534346876
M:
I: www.magproductions.nl
A: Postbus 416
7500 AK Enschede
// Integrate Your World //
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alban Hertroys | 2006-04-11 10:15:41 | Re: Performance UPDATE/INSERT |
Previous Message | Thomas Pundt | 2006-04-11 09:52:50 | Re: Performance UPDATE/INSERT |