Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient?

From: Gerhard Wiesinger <lists(at)wiesinger(dot)com>
To: "Raymond O'Donnell" <rod(at)iol(dot)ie>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient?
Date: 2009-01-29 17:01:52
Message-ID: alpine.LFD.2.00.0901291759490.16134@bbs.intern
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Hello Ray,

Yes, that's clear. But there was even some stuff which isn't dumped with
pg_dumpall (as far as I read).

So it was like to run 2 statements like:
1.) Run pg_dumpall
2.) Run pg_dump additionally ...

Ciao,
Gerhard

--
http://www.wiesinger.com/

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Raymond O'Donnell wrote:

> On 29/01/2009 16:31, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote:
>
>> I recently read some Mail on the mailinglist where some parts of
>> PostgreSQL were not dumped with pg_dumpall and additionally some pg_dump
>> was necessary (it was something like internals, catalog, etc.)
>
> It's the other way around - pg_dump dumps just the specified database,
> but not cluster-wide stuff like login roles; you need to do a pg_dumpall
> to get those as well.
>
> Ray.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Raymond O'Donnell, Director of Music, Galway Cathedral, Ireland
> rod(at)iol(dot)ie
> Galway Cathedral Recitals: http://www.galwaycathedral.org/recitals
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jason Long 2009-01-29 17:04:17 Re: Pet Peeves?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-01-29 17:01:09 Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient?