Re: Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump

From: Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump
Date: 2016-10-23 17:15:17
Message-ID: VisenaEmail.21.a63bf9f6ad8a6d62.157f28873f6@tc7-visena
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

På søndag 23. oktober 2016 kl. 17:06:57, skrev Guillaume Lelarge <
guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info <mailto:guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>>:
2016-03-08 21:06 GMT+01:00 Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com
<mailto:andreas(at)visena(dot)com>>: På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 21:03:01, skrev
David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com
<mailto:david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>>:
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com
<mailto:andreas(at)visena(dot)com>> wrote:
På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 17:38:04, skrev Joshua D. Drake <
jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com <mailto:jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>>:
On 03/08/2016 08:02 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 16:57:01, skrev Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
<mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>>>:
>
>     Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com <mailto:andreas(at)visena(dot)com>>
writes:
>      > What I'm looking for is "inverse -b" in an otherwise complete
>     dump. Any plans
>      > to add that?
>
>     [ shrug... ]  Nobody ever asked for it before.
>
>     regards, tom lane
>
> It surely helps testing production-datasets which contain lots of BLOBs
> where one wants to dump the production-data into a test-env. We have
>  >1TB databases containing > 95% blobs so it would help us tremendously
> to have this option.

I have quite a few customers that would benefit from the ability to not
have blobs present in dumps.
 
Great! So how do we proceed to get "--no-blobs" added to pg_dump?
Maybe CommandPrompt and Visena should co-fund development of such an addition,
if it's accepted by -hackers?
We'd be willing to pay for such an addition for the 9.5 branch, as a patch.
 
​Unfortunately this doesn't qualify as a bug fix - it is a new feature and
thus is ineligible for inclusion in official 9.5

 

David J.

 

Of course. That's why I mentioned that, if possible, an unofficial patch to
9.5 could be developed, funded partly by Visena (my company). Given that
someone is willing to do this of course.
 

 
That probably should look like the patch attached. It applies cleanly on HEAD,
and works AFAICT. If this patch seems interesting enough, I'll add it to the
next commit fest (note for myself, update the ref/pg_dump.sgml documentation
file).

For Andreas' information, it also applies on 9.5, though I didn't check if it
worked afterwards.

 
+1 for adding it to the commitfest.
 
It's almost scary how simple this patch is and noone ever got around to
implement it.
 
Thanks, I'll test it on 9.5 soon.
 
-- Andreas Joseph Krogh
CTO / Partner - Visena AS
Mobile: +47 909 56 963
andreas(at)visena(dot)com <mailto:andreas(at)visena(dot)com>
www.visena.com <https://www.visena.com>
<https://www.visena.com>

 

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andre Mikulec 2016-10-23 17:34:03 Re: make PostgreSQL with TCLSH: No rule to make target
Previous Message Nicolas Paris 2016-10-23 16:12:15 postgres_fdw : disable extended queries

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-10-23 17:47:56 Assertion failures due to testing visibility without buffer lock
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2016-10-23 17:00:23 Re: condition variables