Re: pg_dump and sequences (bug ?)

From: strk <strk(at)keybit(dot)net>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump and sequences (bug ?)
Date: 2004-08-08 11:40:40
Message-ID: 20040808114040.GA23683@freek.keybit.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 12:50:43PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Also, given this and your previous operator commutator problem, I
> strongly suspect that someone has taken an axe to the system catalogs on
> your installation and they are very screwy.

System catalogs screws are possible.
That someone is probably me, but I don't remember pg_dump
giving me any warning about this. Also I think I've run vacuum
on the db before dumping.

As before I'm not on the source computer so I can't send the
pg_dump -s, but if you want, I can send you the pg_restore -l.

--strk;

>
> Chris
>
>
> strk wrote:
>
> >Using pg_dump from postgresql 7.3.4 I've obtained
> >a dump file containing a SEQUENCE SET with no
> >corresponding SEQUENCE. I've seen that this is usually
> >due to the presence of a table with a 'serial' field,
> >but since in this case there is no such table I wonder
> >if this is a bug in pg_dump.
> >
> >The only reason I can imagine for this is pg_dump taking
> >any sequence whose name ends in _seq as being associated
> >to a table, no matter if that table exists and has a 'serial'
> >field. Is this possible ? Shouldn't this kind of dependency
> >be coded somehow ?
> >
> >TIA
> >
> >--strk;
> >
> >---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> >TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-08-08 14:43:47 Ready for Beta ... ?
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2004-08-08 10:42:13 Re: [PATCHES] That dump-comments-on-composite-type-columns patch...