Re: pg_dumpall + restore = missing view

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas F.O'Connell
Тема Re: pg_dumpall + restore = missing view
Дата
Msg-id 9DC9829A-3DC6-11D9-8E47-000D93AE0944@sitening.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_dumpall + restore = missing view  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: pg_dumpall + restore = missing view  (jseymour@linxnet.com (Jim Seymour))
Список pgsql-general
For the record, you shouldn't have needed to do a dump restore between
7.4.1 and 7.4.6 should you?

-tfo

--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Co-Founder, Information Architect
Sitening, LLC
http://www.sitening.com/
110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6
Nashville, TN 37203-6320
615-260-0005

On Nov 19, 2004, at 7:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Steve Crawford <scrawford@pinpointresearch.com> writes:
>> This appears to have all gone well execpt that one view is missing.
>> I've restored that view by hand but am curious if this is a PG bug or
>> failure of the nut behind the wheel.
>
>> The view involves the union of many tables and its creation failed
>> because creation of one of the tables does not take place until later
>> in the dump file.
>
> This is a longstanding pg_dump bug: it's not very bright about order of
> creation of objects.  (In this case I surmise that you created the
> view,
> and later altered it to reference a table that didn't exist when the
> view was originally created.)
>
> As of 8.0 pg_dump examines dependency information and should
> theoretically
> always get this right, but in prior versions it's a real hazard.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: jseymour@linxnet.com (Jim Seymour)
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Upcoming Changes to News Server ...
Следующее
От: jseymour@linxnet.com (Jim Seymour)
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_dumpall + restore = missing view