On 6/9/21 9:50 PM, Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) wrote: > Having now successfully migrated from PostgreSQL v9.6 to v13.2 in > Amazon RDS, I wondered, why I am paying AWS for an RDS-based version, > when I was forced by their POLICY to go through the effort I did? I'm > not one of the crowd who thinks, "It works OK, so I don't update > anything". I'm usually one who is VERY quick to apply upgrades, > especially when there is a fallback ability. However, the initial > failure to successfully upgrade from v9.6 to any more recent major > version, put me in a time-limited box that I really don't like to be in. > > If I'm going to have to deal with maintenance issues, like I easily > did when I ran native PostgreSQL, why not go back to that? So, I've > ported my database back to native PostgreSQL v13.3 on an AWS EC2 > instance. It looks like I will save about 40% of the cost, which is > in accord with this article: > https://www.iobasis.com/Strategies-to-reduce-Amazon-RDS-Costs/ > > Why am I mentioning this here? Because there were minor issues & > benefits in porting back to native PostgreSQL, that may be of interest > here: > > First, pg_dumpall (v13.3) errors out, because on RDS, you cannot be a > superuser, & it tries to dump protected stuff. If there is a way > around that, I'd like to know it, even though it's not an issue now. > pg_dump works OK, but of course you don't get the roles dumped. > Fortunately, I kept script files that have all the database setup, so > I just ran them to create all the relationships, & then used the > pg_dump output. Worked flawlessly. This was added in release 12 specifically with RDS in mind: pg_dumpall --exclude-database cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
