Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)

From: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
To: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com>
Cc: Brian Weaver <cmdrclueless(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)
Date: 2012-02-25 18:10:09
Message-ID: 1330193409.2593.5.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-admin
On Sat, 2012-02-25 at 09:23 -0700, Scott Ribe wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Brian Weaver wrote:
> > Thanks for the pointer. Is it just me that finds it the behavior of pg_restore odd? If the default installation since 9.0 has PL/PgSQL installed then why does pg_restore still emit statements to create the language? As a developer by trade it smells like a bug. 
> It's pg_dump that's emitting the command to create the language. If you ran pg_dump from 9.0+, it would not do so.

Not quite true. pg_dump from 9.0 does save the language definition, but
it uses the new CREATE OR REPLACE statement for languages, so that, when
you restore it in a 9.0+ database that already has the same language, it
won't complain with an error message.

BTW, it isn't odd that pg_dump 9.0 save the language definition. Having
by default the plpgsql language when you create a database doesn't mean
you can't drop it.

>  This is an example of why the standard advice for upgrading is to use the newer pg_dump against the older database



In response to


pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: Brian WeaverDate: 2012-02-25 19:51:20
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)
Previous:From: Scott RibeDate: 2012-02-25 16:23:50
Subject: Re: Problems with pg_restore (plpgsql already exists)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group