Re: pg_dump - txt sql vs binary - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Michael Fuhr
Subject Re: pg_dump - txt sql vs binary
Date
Msg-id 20060124212404.GA91387@winnie.fuhr.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump - txt sql vs binary  (Ciprian Hodorogea <ciprian.hodorogea@bitsp.com>)
Responses Re: pg_dump - txt sql vs binary
List pgsql-admin
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 10:33:50AM +0200, Ciprian Hodorogea wrote:
> >pg_dump is certainly the preferred method.
>
> I have Postgres 8.1.1 installed on a Windows machine and on a Linux
> machine. When I do pg_dump (from Windows) and then pg_restore from
> Linux, I get 52 errors, which I ignore and things seem to work fine, but
> I suppose something is wrong about this...

As Tom mentioned, the Windows box apparently has some contributed
modules that the Linux box doesn't, so when you try to restore the
catalog entries on Linux you get errors.  If you know you don't
need those modules then you can ignore the errors; if you'd like
to have an error-free restore then either add the modules to Linux,
remove them from Windows, or delete them from the backup.  If you're
using pg_restore then you could use the -l/--list and -L/--use-list
options to omit certain objects from the restore.  See the documentation
for an example.

> It is only the setup from the website that I have installed and not
> other contribs.

Did you build from source or did you install a pre-built package?
If from source then the contributed modules are in the contrib
directory; if from a package then look around for another package
that contains the contributed modules.

--
Michael Fuhr

pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Arnau
Date:
Subject: Re: Where is my bottleneck?
Next
From: Jaime Casanova
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump - txt sql vs binary