On 12/2/20 6:54 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 12/2/20 4:38 PM, Ron wrote:
>> On 12/2/20 6:21 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>>> On 12/2/20 4:13 PM, Ron wrote:
>>>> On 12/2/20 6:08 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:06 PM Ron <ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto:ronljohnsonjr@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That you were comparing apples and oranges - specifically that the
>>>>> database you were dumping was empty but the one you were checking was
>>>>> not.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I could have shown the exact psql commands
>>>> (/usr/lib/postgresql/12/bin/psql -p5433) it wasn't necessary.
>>>
>>> From the POV of the mailing list participants it was necessary as the
>>> below constitutes hidden information we didn't have access to. When
>>> presenting a issue explicit is better then implicit. I cannot count the
>>> number of times issues where solved on this list when someone got around
>>> to asking for a explicit command.
>>
>> Shame on me for assuming, based on the explicit pg_dump command in the
>> example.
>
> The implied part was this:
>
> postgres=# \d+ measurement
>
> There was no indication of how you got there. You knew but we didn't and
> given how many times it has happened that folks where looking at one
> instance in one part of their problem report and another instance in
> separate part of the report it is only prudent to ask.
You're absolutely right. Like I said, shame on me.
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.