Re: pg_restore new option -m

From: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_restore new option -m
Date: 2009-02-19 16:01:27
Message-ID: Pine.UW2.4.63.0902191700150.125@sun.pyrenet
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Tom Lane wrote:

> Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:05:32 -0500
> From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> To: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
> Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_restore new option -m
>
> ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr writes:
>> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> You sure you don't get exactly the same without -m?
>>>
>> yes!
>
> We're going to need to see the test case then.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
they were included in the last mail :)
--
Olivier PRENANT Tel: +33-5-61-50-97-00 (Work)
15, Chemin des Monges +33-5-61-50-97-01 (Fax)
31190 AUTERIVE +33-6-07-63-80-64 (GSM)
FRANCE Email: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make your life a dream, make your dream a reality. (St Exupery)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-02-19 16:01:45 Re: Doubts about EvalPlanQual
Previous Message Euler Taveira de Oliveira 2009-02-19 15:56:07 Re: autovacuum not honoring pg_autovacuum in 8.3.5?