Stephen Frost wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > Well, you would have to remove it _after_ you did the pg_upgrade. Right > > now if you do a normal dump/restore upgrade, you also have to re-remove > > the postgres database. We don't have any mechanism to drop a database > > as part of pg_dumpall's restore if it didn't exist in the old cluster. > > Perhaps not, but it *could* be removed after the restore and all would > be well, yes?
I am not sure how much pg_dump worries about removing system objects during a restore --- I don't think it does that at all actually. I thought we did that for plpgsql, but I don't see that in the C code now, and testing doesn't show it being removed by pg_dump. > > > Regarding pg_dumpall and pg_restore, I'm pretty sure both of those can > > > be configured to connect to other databases instead, including for > > > globals. > > > > Well, please show me the code, because the C code I showed you had the > > '\connect postgres' string hardcoded in there. > > I guess there's a difference between "can be used and will work > correctly, but might create some extra garbage" and "can't be used at > all". pg_dumpall has a -l option for connecting to whatever *existing* > database you have to pull the global data, and then it'll restore into a > clean initdb'd cluster, after which you could remove postgres. Keep in mind -l might connect to a specified database to do the dump, but it will still connect to the 'postgres' database to recreate them. > Admittedly, if you initdb the cluster, drop postgres, and then try a > restore, it would fail. Personally, I'm not a big fan of that (why Right, same with pg_upgrade. > don't we use what was passed in to -l for that..?), but, practically, No idea. > it's not that big a deal. I don't know many folks who are going to > restore a pg_dumpall dump into an existing configuration where they've > monkied with things (that could cause all kinds of other issues anyway, > role conflicts, etc). > > If I understood correctly (perhaps I didn't..), is that pg_upgrade > doesn't have the pg_dumpall equivilant of the '-l' or '--database' > option, and that's what is at issue here. Well, I can modify pg_upgrade to connect to template1 easily (no need for a switch) --- the problem is that pg_dumpall requires the 'postgres' database to restore its dump file. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
