So back to Marc's request, it would seem that making pg_dump do
something predictable if specifically requested to do so would
alleviate Marc's problem ?
Dave
On 1-Dec-06, at 10:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com> writes:
>> Actually, if there were a working and maintained pg_upgrade, I'm
>> pretty
>> sure nobody would use pg_dump as an upgrade facility anymore.
>
> You think so eh? Hint: the only workable design I've seen for
> pg_upgrade
> uses pg_dump as a component. It's much easier to handle
> version-to-version changes in pg_dump than it would be inside the
> server.
> Example: there is no way that a pre-8.1 server could be expected to
> know
> that it had better set standard_conforming_strings = off to ensure
> that
> the SQL it's emitting will be understood properly by a post-8.3
> server.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that
> your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
