Re: pg_extension_config_dump() with a sequence - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_extension_config_dump() with a sequence
Date
Msg-id 32049.1377658206@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_extension_config_dump() with a sequence  (Moshe Jacobson <moshe@neadwerx.com>)
Responses Re: pg_extension_config_dump() with a sequence  (Moshe Jacobson <moshe@neadwerx.com>)
List pgsql-general
Moshe Jacobson <moshe@neadwerx.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:58 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Well, I think you did it wrong, or else you're using a PG version that
>> predates some necessary fix, because it works for me.

> Sorry for the delayed response. I am using postgres 9.1.4 with pg_dump of
> the same version.

Ah.  I think that you are missing this 9.1.7 fix:

commit 5110a96992e508b220a7a6ab303b0501c4237b4a
Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date:   Fri Oct 26 12:12:53 2012 -0400

    In pg_dump, dump SEQUENCE SET items in the data not pre-data section.

    Represent a sequence's current value as a separate TableDataInfo dumpable
    object, so that it can be dumped within the data section of the archive
    rather than in pre-data.  This fixes an undesirable inconsistency between
    the meanings of "--data-only" and "--section=data", and also fixes dumping
    of sequences that are marked as extension configuration tables, as per a
    report from Marko Kreen back in July.  The main cost is that we do one more
    SQL query per sequence, but that's probably not very meaningful in most
    databases.

    Back-patch to 9.1, since it has the extension configuration issue even
    though not the --section switch.


            regards, tom lane


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: 高健
Date:
Subject: Re: What is the relationship between checkpoint and wal
Next
From: Jayadevan
Date:
Subject: Re: OLAP