pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feed9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
5+ messages / 4 participants
[nested] [flat]
* 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
@ 2015-01-13 14:41 Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ray Stell @ 2015-01-13 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Is it valid to dump a 9.0 db with a 9.4 pg_dump and make use of the
parallel feature? TIA.
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
@ 2015-01-13 15:23 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2015-01-13 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu> writes:
> Is it valid to dump a 9.0 db with a 9.4 pg_dump and make use of the
> parallel feature? TIA.
Yes, but be aware that 9.4 pg_dump will be generating output meant to
be loaded into a 9.4 server. You might have to make some adjustments
if you mean to reload it into 9.0.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
@ 2015-01-13 15:34 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Frost @ 2015-01-13 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>; pgsql-admin
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu> writes:
> > Is it valid to dump a 9.0 db with a 9.4 pg_dump and make use of the
> > parallel feature? TIA.
>
> Yes, but be aware that 9.4 pg_dump will be generating output meant to
> be loaded into a 9.4 server. You might have to make some adjustments
> if you mean to reload it into 9.0.
Also be aware that you won't get a synchronized snapshot and therefore
the resulting dump might not be valid..
Looking at pg_dump, for my 2c anyway, it'd be nicer if we threw an error
on parallel dump request when the major version doesn't support
synchronized snapshots, unless the user explicitly passed
--no-synchronized-snapshots, indicating that they don't care.
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 818B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
@ 2015-01-13 15:36 Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
parent: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Frost @ 2015-01-13 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>; pgsql-admin
* Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) wrote:
> Looking at pg_dump, for my 2c anyway, it'd be nicer if we threw an error
> on parallel dump request when the major version doesn't support
> synchronized snapshots, unless the user explicitly passed
> --no-synchronized-snapshots, indicating that they don't care.
Ah, bah, we do that already. Good on us. I was looking at where the
snapshot is actually taken and didn't notice the earlier check.
Nevermind me.
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 818B) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db
@ 2015-01-13 18:06 Jerry Sievers <gsievers19@comcast.net>
parent: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jerry Sievers @ 2015-01-13 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>; +Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>; pgsql-admin
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Stephen Frost (sfrost@snowman.net) wrote:
>
>> Looking at pg_dump, for my 2c anyway, it'd be nicer if we threw an error
>> on parallel dump request when the major version doesn't support
>> synchronized snapshots, unless the user explicitly passed
>> --no-synchronized-snapshots, indicating that they don't care.
>
> Ah, bah, we do that already. Good on us. I was looking at where the
> snapshot is actually taken and didn't notice the earlier check.
The OP didn't mention if the DB is huge and/or inconvenient to quiesce.
But in any case, doing a --jobs N dump from a per-snapshot origin system
requuires the system be quiescent just long enough to get the pg_dump
master process and all workers connected.
I assume this is due to pg_dump running all of its N workers each using
a persistent connection and in a serialized transaction.
Thus --jobs --no-sync-snap is very slick indeedy!!
FYI
>
> Nevermind me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
--
Jerry Sievers
Postgres DBA/Development Consulting
e: postgres.consulting@comcast.net
p: 312.241.7800
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-13 18:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-13 14:41 9.4 pg_dump use on 9.0 db Ray Stell <stellr@vt.edu>
2015-01-13 15:23 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2015-01-13 15:34 ` Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
2015-01-13 15:36 ` Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
2015-01-13 18:06 ` Jerry Sievers <gsievers19@comcast.net>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox