Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> 2) pg_restore needs to be more tolerant with certain kinds of errors.
> Hmmm, dunno about this - it wasn't on my radar really. I'll experiment
> with it, but I don't think I'm going to have time before June 30th :(
I think we dealt with this already: pg_restore has been taught that the
correct response to a SQL command error is to report it and forge ahead,
not curl up and die.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-06-24 04:00:56|
|Subject: Re: pg_get_indexdef |
|Previous:||From: Christopher Kings-Lynne||Date: 2004-06-24 03:58:52|
|Subject: Fixing pg_dump|