Re: unlogged sequences
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: unlogged sequences |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwZjDD-_k-m8EWiNfcqhNrw-B-4LkjfPXi+D-a-rTt00FA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: unlogged sequences (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: unlogged sequences
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 12:36 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
On 03.04.22 20:50, David G. Johnston wrote:
> However, tables having an identity sequence seem to be unaddressed in
> this patch. The existing (and unchanged) pg_dump.c code results in:
It is addressed. For example, run this in PG14:
create unlogged table t1 (a int generated always as identity, b text);
Then dump it with PG15 with this patch:
Sorry, I wasn't being specific enough. Per our documentation (and I seem to recall many comments from Tom):
"Because pg_dump is used to transfer data to newer versions of PostgreSQL, the output of pg_dump can be expected to load into PostgreSQL server versions newer than pg_dump's version." [1]
That is what I'm getting on about when talking about migrations. So a v14 SQL backup produced by a v14 pg_dump restored by a v15 psql. (custom format and pg_restore supposedly aren't supposed to be different though, right?)
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: