Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 014CC2E0084 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:32:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42240-04-2 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:32:04 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685CB2E00C0 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:25:25 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m3H5PMeS009880; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:25:22 -0400 (EDT) To: Achilleas Mantzios cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Examining very large dumps In-reply-to: <200804170818.47160.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> References: <200804161235.27157.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> <8622.1208359420@sss.pgh.pa.us> <200804170818.47160.achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com> Comments: In-reply-to Achilleas Mantzios message dated "Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:18:46 +0300" Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 01:25:22 -0400 Message-ID: <9879.1208409922@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200804/164 X-Sequence-Number: 28928 Achilleas Mantzios writes: >> Did you make the dump using 8.3's pg_dump? > Yes, with 8.3.1's pg_dump (data only dump) That would be your problem. *Don't* use a data-only dump, it lobotomizes all intelligence in the system and leaves it up to you to deal with foreign-key ordering issues. There are lots of performance arguments against that as well. See the advice at http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/populate.html regards, tom lane