From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:54:47 -0600
Message-ID: <4A65F2D7.8000901@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15027.1248194992@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <4A65EC7A.8010003@gmail.com>
<15027.1248194992@sss.pgh.pa.us>
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
>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: robjsargent@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Order of operations in ascii vs archive format (moderately urgent)
In-Reply-To: <4A65F2D7.8000901@gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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