Re: Version upgrade: is restoring the postgres database needed?

From: Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>
Cc: "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Version upgrade: is restoring the postgres database needed?
Date: 2018-03-01 17:03:16
Message-ID: CANu8Fiw3P6LEo=tA1OtZ2mbrbCh0M+zC6DJqFUEXVmzJkWyoGQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> wrote:

> On 03/01/2018 10:37 AM, Vick Khera wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:15 AM, Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>
> wrote:
>
>> No, I do:
>>
>> $ pg_dump -Fc PROD > PROD.pgdump
>> $ pg_dump --globals-only postgres > globals.sql
>> $ pg_dump -Fc postgres > postgres.pgdump
>>
>>
> That's how I back them up as well. You are correct that all you need to do
> is restore the globals.sql, then each "pgdump" file individually. Just
> ignore the warning when it tries to restore your initial postgres
> superuser, since it was created by the initdb already.
>
> You probably don't need the "postgres" db at all, since it is just there
> to allow the client to connect to something on initial install. Normally
> you don't use it in production.
>
>
> Good. What, then, have I forgotten to restore such that the "Access
> privileges" are showing on my current 9.2 servers, but not on the
> newly-restored 9.6.6 server?
>
> *Current*
> postgres=# \l
> List of databases
> Name | Owner | Encoding | Collate | Ctype | Access
> privileges
> -------------+----------+----------+-------------+----------
> ---+-----------------------
> CSSCAT_STI | CSS | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
> CSS=CTc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> =Tc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> app_user=CTc/CSS
> CSSCAT_STIB | CSS | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
> CSS=CTc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> =Tc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> app_user=CTc/CSS
> CSSCAT_STIC | CSS | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
> CSS=CTc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> =Tc/CSS +
> | | | | |
> app_user=CTc/CSS
>
> *Newly restored*
> postgres=# \l
> List of databases
> Name | Owner | Encoding | Collate | Ctype | Access
> privileges
> -------------+----------+----------+-------------+----------
> ---+-----------------------
> CSSCAT_STIB | CSS | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
> CSSCAT_STIC | CSS | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
> postgres | postgres | UTF8 | en_US.UTF-8 | en_US.UTF-8 |
>
>
> --
> Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
>

*>$ pg_dump -Fc PROD > PROD.pgdump >$ pg_dump --globals-only postgres >
globals.sql >$ pg_dump -Fc postgres > postgres.pgdump *

*The last I looked, pg_dump does not have a "--globals-only"*

*Did you mean? $ pg_dump -Fc PROD > PROD.pgdump $ pg_dumpall --globals-only
postgres > globals.sqlOR $ pg_dumpall -g > globals.sql $ pg_dump -Fc
postgres > postgres.pgdump *

--
*Melvin Davidson*
*Maj. Database & Exploration Specialist*
*Universe Exploration Command – UXC*
Employment by invitation only!

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Atkins 2018-03-01 17:07:16 Re: Enforce primary key on every table during dev?
Previous Message Ron Johnson 2018-03-01 16:51:05 Re: Version upgrade: is restoring the postgres database needed?