Re: pg_dump

From: Дмитрий Воронин <carriingfate92(at)yandex(dot)ru>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump
Date: 2015-10-30 06:34:39
Message-ID: 1800261446186879@web13g.yandex.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> More specifically, I am not quite understanding the distinction
> between "all cluster" and "global objects."

all cluster is roles, tablespaces, databases with it's content.
global objects is roles, tablespaces.

> What do you have in mind on the implementation side? Do you think
> pg_dump is a suitable baseline, or were you thinking of something
> different, and if so, what?

I think, the baseline is pg_dump. So, pg_dump create a dump of database and it's content. pg_dump must backup comments, security labels (if exists)
in some portable format (see my messages earlier). In our solution we now use proposed way for backup and restore COMMENTs and SECURITY LABELs on DATABASE).

If my solution is good, I am ready to cooperate with rethinking and rewriting (if needed) mechanism of dumping in PostgreSQL.

P.S. I already think so, that we needed in rethinking idea of dumping and restore objects if PostgreSQL.

Thank you.

-- 
Best regards, Dmitry Voronin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robins 2015-10-30 08:00:04 Re: Cross-check recent documentation changes
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2015-10-30 02:22:13 Re: pgxs/config/missing is... missing