Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump doesn't work well with large object ...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Sauer <davids(at)orfinet(dot)cz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump doesn't work well with large object ...
Date: 1999-06-03 04:46:46
Message-ID: 5441.928385206@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Sauer <davids(at)orfinet(dot)cz> writes:
> I have problem with pg_dump with CVS snapshot 19990526:
> failed sanity check, table xinv35274 was not found

I have fixed this to the extent that pg_dump ignores large objects,
as it is documented to do. (It was doing that just fine, but it
failed to ignore the indexes on the large objects :-(.)

Of course what you'd really like is for a pg_dump script to save
and restore large objects along with everything else. But there
seem to be several big problems to be solved before that can happen.
The worst is that a large object's OID will likely be recorded in
at least one other table in the database, and pg_dump is not nearly
smart enough to find and update those references...

regards, tom lane

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 1999-06-03 05:31:45 Re: [HACKERS] Re: Freezing docs for v6.5
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-06-03 04:33:38 Re: [HACKERS] Re: Freezing docs for v6.5]