From: | Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, PGSQL Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump custom format across versions |
Date: | 2010-05-12 22:56:02 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimZPQ6aDmfXLbjYD0KeOlhdhRuapkKzkHZ6na3X@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 12 May 2010 20:18, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On 12 May 2010 19:40, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> Am I to gather that there are possible incompatibilities?
> >>
> >> Definitely.
>
> > In that case, it might be an idea to clarify that on the documentation.
> I
> > couldn't find this information.
>
> If it were true, it would be in the documentation.
>
> The reason for suggesting that you use the newer pg_dump during a
> version upgrade is that the newer version might have bug fixes that
> your current version lacks. In the absence of bugs, however, pg_restore
> is supposed to read dump files produced by older versions of pg_dump.
> If it fails to, that in itself is a filable bug.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ah, I see. Thanks. Well I think that information would still be useful in
the docs.
Thom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2010-05-13 00:04:42 | Re: List traffic |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2010-05-12 22:43:56 | Re: List traffic |