Re: Is pg_restore in 10.6 working? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From raf
Subject Re: Is pg_restore in 10.6 working?
Date
Msg-id 20181112221030.ftnrxugdn37yzdrh@raf.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is pg_restore in 10.6 working?  (raf <raf@raf.org>)
List pgsql-general
raf wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > David <dlbarron28@gmail.com> writes:
> > > I have some experience with different versions of Postgres, but I'm just
> > > getting around to using pg_restore, and it's not working for me at all.
> > > ...
> > > But a matching pg_restore command does nothing.
> > > pg_restore -U postgres -f predata.sql -v
> > 
> > This command expects to read from stdin and write to predata.sql, so
> > it's not surprising that it's just sitting there.  What you want
> > is something along the lines of
> > 
> > pg_restore -U postgres -d dbname -v <predata.sql
> > 
> >             regards, tom lane
> 
> Does that mean there's a bug in the usage message?
> 
> pg_restore --help says (admittedly on 9.5 but it's probably the same with 10.6):
> 
>   Usage:
>     pg_restore [OPTION]... [FILE]
> 
>     ...
> 
>     If no input file name is supplied, then standard input is used.
> 
> To me, that says that a filename on the command line after the options
> will be read as the source of the restore. Only if it is absent would
> stdin be used.
> 
> Apologies if the usage message for 10.6 doesn't say the same thing.

Ah, I didn't notice the -f (output) option. Never mind.

cheers,
raf



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: raf
Date:
Subject: Re: Is pg_restore in 10.6 working?
Next
From: David
Date:
Subject: Re: Is pg_restore in 10.6 working?