Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: AW: Modified pg_dump & new pg_restore need testing...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: AW: Modified pg_dump & new pg_restore need testing...
Date: 2000-07-03 14:57:43
Message-ID: 19337.962636263@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> writes:
> Imho the default should be text for anything except data. The data
> should imho be in a format similar to a binary cursor. I say similar,
> because this format should probably be converted to a network byte
> order, so you can restore on another hardware. Imho calling type
> output and input functions during backup/restore is a substantial
> overhead that would best be avoided.

I think this would be an extremely *bad* idea.  One of the principal
functions of pg_dump is to provide a portable representation of data;
that is, portable across machines and across Postgres versions (where
the internal representation of data may change!).

Not only should binary data representation not be the default, IMHO
we shouldn't offer it as an option either.  Otherwise dbadmins will
promptly shoot themselves in the foot with it.  Do you want to field
the support calls saying "help, I already blew away my 7.n installation
but 7.n+1 won't read my pg_dump backup"?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ned LillyDate: 2000-07-03 15:09:21
Subject: proposed improvements to PostgreSQL license
Previous:From: Chris BitmeadDate: 2000-07-03 14:47:49
Subject: Re: Backend Question

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group