pg.ddx.io pgsql-sql@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedOrder of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
5+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
@ 2009-07-21 16:27 Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rob Sargent @ 2009-07-21 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Is there a difference in the order of execution between an ascii dump
and one using the "custom" format? Or any difference in the general
operation?
I need to know if I can rely on the ascii version to tell me what the
custom format might have done.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
@ 2009-07-21 16:49 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2009-07-21 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-sql
Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> writes:
> Is there a difference in the order of execution between an ascii dump
> and one using the "custom" format? Or any difference in the general
> operation?
There's not supposed to be. One standard test on the pg_dump code is
pg_dump >textfile
pg_dump -Fc >dumpfile
pg_restore dumpfile >textfile2
diff textfile textfile2
If these don't produce the same results something is broken.
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
@ 2009-07-21 16:54 Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rob Sargent @ 2009-07-21 16:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-sql
Wonderful news.
I just ran dump and restore against same production server. Constraints
and the absence of drop <object> calls appears to have saved my butt.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is there a difference in the order of execution between an ascii dump
>> and one using the "custom" format? Or any difference in the general
>> operation?
>>
>
> There's not supposed to be. One standard test on the pg_dump code is
> pg_dump >textfile
> pg_dump -Fc >dumpfile
> pg_restore dumpfile >textfile2
> diff textfile textfile2
> If these don't produce the same results something is broken.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
@ 2009-07-21 17:24 Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rob Sargent @ 2009-07-21 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: pgsql-sql
The ascii dump has serveral CREATE FUNCTION gbtreeN_{in,out} but I don't
see them in the current (source) database using '\df gbtree*'. Using
'\df gbt*' I get 111 functions for which all the names begin 'gbt_'.
Have I lost them? The gbtreekeyN types are still there.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is there a difference in the order of execution between an ascii dump
>> and one using the "custom" format? Or any difference in the general
>> operation?
>>
>
> There's not supposed to be. One standard test on the pg_dump code is
> pg_dump >textfile
> pg_dump -Fc >dumpfile
> pg_restore dumpfile >textfile2
> diff textfile textfile2
> If these don't produce the same results something is broken.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
@ 2009-07-21 17:29 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2009-07-21 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-sql
Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com> writes:
> The ascii dump has serveral CREATE FUNCTION gbtreeN_{in,out} but I don't
> see them in the current (source) database using '\df gbtree*'.
Which ones? Pre-8.4 \df will deliberately suppress I/O functions
(or functions that it thinks are I/O functions, anyway).
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-07-21 17:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-07-21 16:27 Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent) Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
2009-07-21 16:49 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2009-07-21 16:54 ` Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
2009-07-21 17:24 ` Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
2009-07-21 17:29 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
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