| From: | Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it> |
|---|---|
| To: | c k <shreeseva(dot)learning(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: suggestion for backup |
| Date: | 2012-05-20 07:13:44 |
| Message-ID: | 4FB899A8.1050608@2ndQuadrant.it |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
Il 19/05/12 19:09, c k ha scritto:
> similar tasks and already using it. This problem arises when I have to
> issue an update script to the client having only function mostly. And
> as most of the functions are dependent on others and having more than
> 1100 functions it becomes hard to write a list of objects for pg_dump.
It may sound unrelated at first, but if you have PostgreSQL 9.1 this use
case matches very well with the new EXTENSION framework. Please look at
the CREATE EXTENSION command and evaluate it.
Cheers,
Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it | www.2ndQuadrant.it
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Harding | 2012-05-20 07:26:26 | Locking or Something Else? |
| Previous Message | Bosco Rama | 2012-05-20 05:57:05 | Re: Why are pg_restore taking that long ? |