Tom Lane wrote:
Another point is that Dave added code to pg_dumpall to not dump the
postgres database. This seems mistaken to me, so I did not include it
in the applied patch: if someone is doing real work in postgres then
they'll be pretty annoyed if it's not backed up. But perhaps the
question needs debate.
Any thoughts?
You are correct, in my opinion. If one is allowed to add objects to the
"postgres" database, than it must obviously be backuped. Otherwise this is
just another way to shoot yourself in the foot. From an "outsiders" point of
view, the postgres database could just look like roots home directory in
/root,... would you exclude that from backups?
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
