| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Monnerie <michael(dot)monnerie(at)is(dot)it-management(dot)at> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Encoding problem using pg_dumpall |
| Date: | 2009-01-30 01:06:41 |
| Message-ID: | 14708.1233277601@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-general |
Michael Monnerie <michael(dot)monnerie(at)is(dot)it-management(dot)at> writes:
> Why couldn't pg_dumpall get the same behaviour as pg_dump? It could get
> that -Fc, and couldn't it be implementet as "call pg_dump for each db
> and once for the system"? Why is it that different at all?
The -Fc (and -Ft) formats are only designed to hold the contents of a
single database; and pg_restore only knows how to restore into a single
database.
If you feel like fixing that, step right up.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-30 01:22:01 | Re: Warm standby recovery failure |
| Previous Message | Lee Azzarello | 2009-01-29 19:47:14 | Warm standby recovery failure |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Frost | 2009-01-30 01:43:06 | Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-30 00:54:28 | Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient? |