Re: initdb failure (was Re: [GENERAL] sequence's plpgsql)

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> 
> > You are assuming it is easy to find what is on a specific line of the
> > dump file.  I am not sure that is always easy for people with limited
> > Unix skills, or MSWin folks.  I am not sure I would have thought to add
> > the file offset to find the problem COPY line.  I guess I would have
> > eventually, but it wouldn't have been my first idea, and I might _not_
> > have used -f on the load, and if the load took an hour, I would have to
> > run it again to get that line number.
> 
> That is all besides the point.  If adding -f to the command line is for
> some reason prohibitive, then the same applies to -e.  That is all.

I see, both -e give query before error, -f gives line number before
error.  I suppose the -e is clearer because you don't have to find the
line in the file, but the -e output makes it more likely they would miss
an error line in the output.

Seems we should recommend -f rather than "<" for restores anyway, right?

Reporting the table with the error is clearer, but this brings up
another case --- what happens with pg_dumpall?  Do we print the database
name or will they know the database name from the table name?

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073