On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 12:28 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 10:14:18AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I agree with Filip that this is a bug. pg_dump clearly doesn't work
>> correctly with inheritance.
>>
>> If I run this command
>>
>> pg_dump -t tab1
>>
>> then I get a dump of "ta
On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 10:14:18AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I agree with Filip that this is a bug. pg_dump clearly doesn't work
> correctly with inheritance.
>
> If I run this command
>
> pg_dump -t tab1
>
> then I get a dump of "tab1". No data is included from tables that inherit
> tab1 b
On 2 October 2015 at 01:19, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski
> wrote:
> > I just want to understand why there is LOCK TABLE not LOCK TABLE ONLY.
>
> It seems to me that you'd still want to use LOCK TABLE particularly if
> the dump is only done on a su
Please take it as a very naive and basic approach :-)
What could go wrong here?
diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
index 36863df..57a50b5 100644
--- a/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
+++ b/src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
@@ -5169,9 +5169,9 @@ getTables(Archive *fout, DumpO
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> OTOH, now that the catalog is MVCC capable, do we even still need to lock
> the objects for a schema-only dump?
Yes. The MVCC snapshots used for catalog reads are stable only for
the duration of one particular catalog read. We're not using the
On 10/7/15 6:44 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski wrote:
Oct 2 2015 01:19 "Michael Paquier" mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski
mailto:filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> > I just want to understand why there is LOCK TABLE not LOCK TABL
Oct 2 2015 01:19 "Michael Paquier" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski <
filip.rembialkow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just want to understand why there is LOCK TABLE not LOCK TABLE ONLY.
>
> It seems to me that you'd still want to use LOCK TABLE particularly if
> the du
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski
wrote:
> I just want to understand why there is LOCK TABLE not LOCK TABLE ONLY.
It seems to me that you'd still want to use LOCK TABLE particularly if
the dump is only done on a subset of tables, using --table for
example.
--
Michael
--
Sen
(sorry I lost the original thread somehow)
tgl wrote:
> Filip wrote:
> > I'm running pg_dump constrained to one schema. It appears that pg_dump runs
> > "LOCK TABLE %s IN ACCESS SHARE MODE" for each table.
> > Naturally it makes sense, but...
> > This schema has a table that serves as parent fo
=?UTF-8?Q?Filip_Rembia=C5=82kowski?= writes:
> I'm running pg_dump constrained to one schema. It appears that pg_dump runs
> "LOCK TABLE %s IN ACCESS SHARE MODE" for each table.
> Naturally it makes sense, but...
> This schema has a table that serves as parent for thousands of child
> tables (v
Hi.
I'm running pg_dump constrained to one schema. It appears that pg_dump runs
"LOCK TABLE %s IN ACCESS SHARE MODE" for each table.
Naturally it makes sense, but...
This schema has a table that serves as parent for thousands of child
tables (via INHERITS).
So effectively, to dump this schema,
11 matches
Mail list logo