Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency
От | Karsten Hilbert |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20131123170746.GK4151@hermes.hilbert.loc обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 08:44:42AM -0800, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Here's my problem with that. Here's setup to create what I don't > think is all that weird a setup: ... > The following appears to produce a good backup, since there is no > error: ... > Now we attempt to restore what we thought was a good backup: > > psql postgres <~/dumpall.sql > > What we get is: > ERROR: cannot execute COMMENT in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute CREATE EXTENSION in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute COMMENT in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute REVOKE in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute REVOKE in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute GRANT in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute GRANT in a read-only transaction ... > ERROR: cannot execute CREATE SCHEMA in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute ALTER SCHEMA in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute CREATE EXTENSION in a read-only transaction > ERROR: cannot execute COMMENT in a read-only transaction ... > If the dump is made with the attached patch, you get this on > restore: ... > The cluster is created in the state that was dumped, default read > only flags and all. I find the patched behaviour more conformant with the Principle Of Least Astonishment. Maybe I am splitting hairs but setting transactions to readonly per default does not mean the database *as such* is to be readonly. It literally applies to the *default* state of transactions (as opposed to the ONLY state of transactions). No more, no less. Karsten -- GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: