From: | Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Dump table using pg_dump vs pg_restore -f |
Date: | 2018-11-30 21:55:42 |
Message-ID: | d3602a98-2d42-760a-12df-50e62ceb83c1@aklaver.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 11/29/18 7:31 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> Postgres 10.6
>
> I am getting different output using:
>
> pg_dump -d production -U postgres -s -t container -f cont.sql
>
> vs
>
> pg_restore -s -t container -f container.sql production_112818.out
>
>
> In the docs:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/app-pgrestore.html
>
> I see:
>
> "
> Note
>
> This flag does not behave identically to the -t flag of pg_dump. There
> is not currently any provision for wild-card matching in pg_restore, nor
> can you include a schema name within its -t.
> "
>
> That to me reads that the difference is for the search method for table
> names only.
>
> The description for:
> -t table
>
> Includes:
>
> "Restore definition and/or data of only the named table. ..."
>
> That in my mind would include the PK and the table triggers.
>
> Am I misunderstanding?
>
Just wondering, am I the only one seeing this issue?
Am I doing something wrong?
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Flower | 2018-11-30 22:10:46 | Re: surprising query optimisation |
Previous Message | Rob Sargent | 2018-11-30 21:00:11 | Re: Vacuum and Materialized view refresh slow |