Re: pg_dump ordering

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump ordering
Date: 2003-08-02 03:07:43
Message-ID: 18659.1059793663@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> In terms of the dependency data, I was planning to dump dependencies as
> well (a trivial skeleton exists); the ordering should happen at
> restore-time (except dump should store it in useful-order on the assumption
> that it will not be possible to re-order at restore-time).

ISTM that once we have the dependency problem sorted out, the important
ordering will always happen during dump, and the facility for
re-ordering during restore will become vestigial. This is a good thing,
since there are many scenarios where you can't seek backwards.

> This is important since we need to allow requests like:
> "restore table xyz and it's dependencies from a full dump"

Right. What will be needed instead will be the ability to know when we
are passing over object X in the dump that we must restore it, because
the object Y that we were asked to restore depends directly or
indirectly on it. So all the dependency info must appear at the front.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-02 03:34:03 Re: psql \encoding fixed
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-08-02 02:55:41 Re: psql \encoding fixed