| From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan-Peter Seifert <Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Kevin Kempter <kevink(at)consistentstate(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: User table porting |
| Date: | 2009-03-10 19:33:54 |
| Message-ID: | dcc563d10903101233s61724bb2hb4a4cd3c34786d3@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Jan-Peter Seifert
<Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de> wrote:
>
> Isn't it generally better to use the newer binaries from the target
> server especially with psql?
Generally this is true.
> I remember getting quite a few errors when restoring a pg_dumpall from
> an 8.1 server, because the create user syntax in the dump file was obsolete.
> You might need some more options for piping (-U etc.):
But we're not really doing a pg_dumpall of everything, just he global
objects. Not sure if there's any issues with a later version versus a
newer version there. Probably best to use the newer pg_dumpall /
pg_dump than the older one though.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter M. Van Buren | 2009-03-10 19:50:55 | Can multiple users own and maintain a database? |
| Previous Message | Jan-Peter Seifert | 2009-03-10 18:29:53 | Re: User table porting |