Re: ordered pg_dump

From: Josh Williams <joshwilliams(at)ij(dot)net>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ordered pg_dump
Date: 2008-11-11 05:01:17
Message-ID: 1226379677.19602.48.camel@godzilla.local.scalefeather.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 17:05 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Is there any interest in an optional mode for pg_dump to order the
> output so that it's easier to use diff?
>
> I don't think it would make the output 100% deterministic, but it would
> make it easier to at least compare the data for small databases.

That'd be cool. I'd done some poking around on the topic a little while
back. The goal was to make the output more predictable so that backups
would be more efficient, specifically with a product that does binary
diffs of some sort.

I may still have some notes somewhere if you're interested. But I
believe the idea was to use COPY with a SELECT statement. The
non-trivial part was to figure out a proper ordering to use.

Or did you plan on combining it with -t, where you could then specify
the ordering for each table?

> I think this has been brought up before, but I couldn't find the thread,
> so I don't know what conclusion was reached.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis

(... Plus, you potentially get a free CLUSTER on a reload.)

- Josh Williams

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Teslenko 2008-11-11 07:52:17 Re: LIKE, "=" and fixed-width character fields
Previous Message Erik Jones 2008-11-11 04:19:33 Re: how to best resync serial columns