I wrote:
> The definitional question is: if we selected only the sequence to dump,
> do we want that ALTER command to appear in the output or not? It's a
> reasonably straightforward fix either way (a bit easier for "not"),
> but I'm unsure which is the most useful behavior.
There doesn't seem to
"Michael Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems to me that the logical way to do this would be that when the
> underlying table is dumped the sequence is dumped with it, like indexes are.
We do that. The question is how to respond when the pg_dump user
specifically commands us to dump only
It seems to me that the logical way to do this would be that when the
underlying table is dumped the sequence is dumped with it, like indexes are.
Otherwise if the table is restored from the dump file the sequence may be
out of sync, or not present at all.
What happens when dumping a table with f
I wrote:
> "Michael Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I've narrowed down the conditions under which pg_dump in 8.2.3 is creating a
>> segmentation fault.
>> It appears to happen only when dumping a sequence that is created for a
>> serial data element.
> Thanks for the test case --- I can repr
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 06:26:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Michael Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've narrowed down the conditions under which pg_dump in 8.2.3 is creating a
> > segmentation fault.
> > It appears to happen only when dumping a sequence that is created for a
> > serial dat
"Michael Nolan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've narrowed down the conditions under which pg_dump in 8.2.3 is creating a
> segmentation fault.
> It appears to happen only when dumping a sequence that is created for a
> serial data element.
Thanks for the test case --- I can reproduce this now on
