I was half awake early this AM and perused my email, and noted a fubar in one of the command sets shown to you but too sleepy to try and reply at the time, and now this thread is WAY too silly long to find it again, but I think someone neglected to put the database name on a pg_restore command. if you don't give pg_restore a dbname, it just spews the SQL out on the console, which is what it sounded like Killian may have described.
yeah, this one from Adrian, at 7:02am PST (Z-0800) this morning....
Per previous posts you want, whenever possible, to us a newer version of pg_dump to move a database from an older version(9.3) to a newer one(9.4). Therefore you should do your dump and restore using the pg_dump.exe and pg_restore.exe from the Bitanami bin directory. I would cd to the above directory and do:
pg_dump -V pg_restore -V
to make sure the programs are found and are the 9.4 versions.
that last needs to have -d newdbname where newdbname has already been created, for instance, by...
Aah, my mistake. Yes you need to specify the database to get the restore to work properly. Also explains why there is nothing in the logs.
OK - with the inclusion of stating the dbname the restore works, but not correctly: what is restored is 24 of 48 tables and 1 of 22 views from one schema and no tables from the other schema.
A log appeared at 0:08 last night (I'm at GMT +1), which I've attached. Plus, I did the dump and restore again this morning and have attached the text from the windows shell if that helps
anyways, this thread has gone on WAY too long, Killian needs to learn the basics of command line operations on MS Windows, which admittedly are rather klunky, but are quite outside the charter of the pgsql-general email list.
Yes, I realise this is high end list, and as mentioned above my pay grade....
p.s. please don't CC me answers, I get every email sent to the list, with the CC's I end up getting two of every one.\
