Can you do that if you have functions tied to the table? Also would that be in a transaction? I need to allow seamless usability to the data while I'm doing this snapshot. Not sure the -c option (Clean Drop schema) would work here. I want to only drop a table and not the entire db so that I'm not moving data that doesn't need to be moved.
The goal is to only shapshot data in tables that has changed. I would like to wrap that in a transaction. -Paul Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 06:40:22AM -0700, Paul Silveira wrote: >> >> Yes the needs are simple. I was also thinking about using DBI. The most >> important thing to me is that everything is kept in a transaction so that >> users can still read the data while I'm snapshotting it at the same time. >> If my transaction is isolated from all the reads happening, then it >> shouldn't matter how long it takes for me to move the data over (granted, >> that will increase latency, but in this project that's not really too >> sensitive) and it will be transparent to the end users. > > Looks to me like the -c option to pg_dump should do what you want. > > <snip> > > Have a nice day, > -- > Martijn van Oosterhout <email@example.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/ >> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to >> litigate. > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/snapshot-replication-with-pg_dump-tf2090351.html#a5908347 Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers forum at Nabble.com. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings