Re: output file name - was pg_restore / psql
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: output file name - was pg_restore / psql |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 41607189.3070609@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | output file name - was pg_restore / psql -f massive problems with (Harald Armin Massa <ghum@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: output file name - was pg_restore / psql
|
Список | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Unless you restore to a database using -d, pg_restore gives you back the SQL (or a list if you use -l). -f specifies where this should go instead of to stdout. Or, as the man page clearly says: pg_restore can operate in two modes: If a database name is specified, the archive is restored directly into the database. Otherwise, a script containing the SQL commands necessary to rebuild the database is cre- ated (and written to a file or standard output), similar to the ones created by the pg_dump plain text format. does that make it clearer? (Reading the man pages is a Good Thing (tm). ) cheers andrew Harald Armin Massa wrote: > Andrey, > > thank you very much! Both informations are correct. > > It is indeed possible to restore with using the -F c option on > pg_dump, and I replaces psql.exe with the one from beta3, and > everything worked correct. > > So it is positive that this information is now on the newer dates in > the psql-mailinglists to google it up - I threw my hopes away after > reading "pg_restore is known not to work" within win32-hackers .))) > > ########################################################### > > Usage: > pg_restore [OPTION]... [FILE] > > General options: > -d, --dbname=NAME output database name > -f, --file=FILENAME output file name > > I struggled some syntax-times with "output file name". What is a > "output file" supposed to be in connection with "pg_Restore"? > > Harald > > >---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend > >
В списке pgsql-hackers-win32 по дате отправления: