Re: pg_dump --> restore loses constraints/triggers?

From: Christopher Murtagh <christopher(dot)murtagh(at)mcgill(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump --> restore loses constraints/triggers?
Date: 2003-02-18 06:05:52
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0302180100510.3063-100000@blues.wcg.mcgill.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
>Which pg_dump did you use? I think 7.3's pg_dump would translate the 7.1
>trigger-based representation correctly, but 7.1's wouldn't know any
>better than to emit CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGER commands.
>
>(But as far as I know, the constraint triggers ought to *work*, they
>just won't look pretty. Please define "broken".)

Thanks for the speedy reply Tom. I used 7.1 pg_dump, and unfortunately,
the server isn't running anymore. When I said 'broken' I really meant that
they weren't there - no constraints, and neither were any corresponding
CREATE CONSTRAINT TRIGGERs.

We use Postgres (and really *love* it) as part of our home-grown central
web system (www.mcgill.ca), and it is constantly evolving. The switchover
happened 10 days ago, and I suspect it would be more work to try to sync
the changes than to re-create foreign key constraints.

Thanks again.

Cheers,

Chris

--

Christopher Murtagh
Webmaster / Sysadmin
Web Communications Group
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec
Canada

Tel.: (514) 398-3122
Fax: (514) 398-2017

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emmanuel Charpentier 2003-02-18 08:26:10 Aggregate definition : small oversight ?
Previous Message Shridhar Daithankar<shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in> 2003-02-18 05:41:38 Re: [HACKERS] Group by, count, order by and limit