From: | Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: sequences and pg_upgrade |
Date: | 2016-09-30 16:50:18 |
Message-ID: | 8741269c-fe04-c496-af92-696f2af5d4f8@postgrespro.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
23.09.2016 21:06, Peter Eisentraut:
> Here is an updated patch set. Compared to the initial set, I have
> changed pg_dump's sorting priorities so that sequence data is always
> after table data. This would otherwise have introduced a problem
> because sortDataAndIndexObjectsBySize() only considers consecutive
> DO_TABLE_DATA entries. Also, I have removed the separate
> --sequence-data switch from pg_dump and made it implicit in
> --binary-upgrade. (So the previous patches 0002 and 0003 have been
> combined, because it's no longer a separate feature.)
>
The patches are good, no complaints.
But again, I have the same question.
I was confused, why do we always dump sequence data,
because I'd overlooked the --sequence-data key. I'd rather leave this
option,
because it's quite non intuitive behaviour...
/* dump sequence data even in schema-only mode */
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-09-30 16:56:22 | Re: Hash Indexes |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2016-09-30 16:48:24 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade from 9.5 to 9.6 fails with "invalid argument" |