From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Hmmm 8.1 pg_dumpall cannot dump older db's? |
Date: | 2005-07-08 03:44:44 |
Message-ID: | 7540.1120794284@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> Ooops :-( Seems like maybe we want it to try postgres and then fall
>> back to trying template1?
> Actually, also ONLY assume postgres is a special database if the backend
> is 8.1 or higher. We don't want to mess with poor people who have
> already created a database called 'postgres' in their installation of
> 7.4, say...
No, because it's special anyway where the dump will be reloaded. Keep
in mind that the design assumption for pg_dump(all) is always that the
destination database will be current release or higher; frequently the
dump file won't even be parseable by older servers.
The thing that makes this slightly painful is that we can't tell what
version we are dumping *from* until we've connected, and so we cannot
automagically "do the right thing" here. I don't really see any other
way to do it than the try-and-fallback approach.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-08 04:12:41 | Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-07-08 03:41:33 | Re: Hmmm 8.1 pg_dumpall cannot dump older db's? |