Re: pg_restore

Does your database restore happen to perform a "Drop owned by" command as part of the restore process? If so, then PostgreSQL Bug #7748 is probably what you are referring to, and this is fixed in the latest patch version of 9.0 (and 9.1 I assume).

Alan

From: pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-admin-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Craig James
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 7:45 PM
To: Kasia Tuszynska
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] pg_restore

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Kasia Tuszynska <ktuszynska(at)esri(dot)com<mailto:ktuszynska(at)esri(dot)com>> wrote:
Hi Everybody,
Has anyone ran into issues running pg_restore?
It seems that between 8.3.8 and 9.0.5, 9.1.3 the behavior of pg_restore has changed.

Previously I was able to have several data owners with their own schemas and running a pg_restore as one superuser was able to restore the objects in those schemas without an issue.

At 9.0.5, I found that I had to restore each schema of a data owner separately.
At 9.1.3, I found that in addition to that I need to make each of those data owners superusers.

I am fully aware that the dev work for core replication was occurring at this time, but I have been unable to find any documentation about the potential changes to the basic pg_restore functionality.

I recently restored a database using 9.2.1 that has a number of schemas, each with a separate owner, and had no problems at all.

Craig

Anyone else noticed or had issues with this?

Sincerely,
Kasia