Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Resurrecting pg_upgrade
Date: 2003-12-15 03:28:23
Message-ID: 3FDD2A57.2060803@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> No. Large object OIDs are preserved in the given proposal.
>
> (Note to self: I wonder whether the recently-added COMMENT ON LARGE
> OBJECT facility works at all over dump/reload...)

How do you mean? pg_dump never writes out the COMMENT ON commands...

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-12-15 03:28:52 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-12-15 03:27:41 Re: [PATCHES] fork/exec patch