From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Groshev Andrey <greenx(at)yandex(dot)ru> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: trouble with upgrade from 9.0 (many schemas and tables) |
Date: | 2013-02-02 01:21:54 |
Message-ID: | CAMkU=1wJTWt4jMb3uHHMOU8gwr=yqLREsp_d7iyU0d-=F=hugQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013, Groshev Andrey wrote:
>
>
> 30.01.2013, 18:47, "Jeff Janes" <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com <javascript:;>>:
>
> > You would probably want to use the pg_dump from 9.2, as there are
> > improvements in that version of pg_dump to speed up partial dumps.
> > You can use pg_dump from 9.2 against server 9.0 and still get the
> > improvements. But that means you should be upgrading to 9.2 rather
> > than 9.1. (Which you should probably do anyway unless you have a
> > specific reason not to.)
>
> Now think about it. Try to make 9.0 -> 9.2 -> 9.1 ?
>
>
Downgrading is generally not supported. Why not just stick with 9.2 as the
end target? If you really need 9.1, I would not entertain the thought of
using 9.2's pg_dump and then trying to go backwards, at least not until I
tried 9.1's dump and proved that it was a serious bottleneck.
Cheers,
Jeff
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | hamann.w | 2013-02-02 09:17:08 | Re: Optimizing query? |
Previous Message | Leonardo M. Ramé | 2013-02-01 19:34:39 | Re: Parsing COPY ... WITH BINARY |