From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TODO list comments |
Date: | 2005-08-25 12:58:39 |
Message-ID: | 1124974720.31109.300.camel@camel |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 21:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> > o Add pg_dumpall custom format dumps.
> >
> > This is probably best done by combining pg_dump and pg_dumpall
> > into a single binary.
>
> This is probably obsoleted by events, too. Now that we can dump blobs
> in text mode, I see no reason that we ever need to do this.
> pg_restore's only real reason to live is to support selective restore
> (ie, pulling out just a few objects from an existing dump) and I do not
> see that you need that for pg_dumpall dumps.
>
Being able to restore just the database users without restoring all
databases? (There are other ways that could be accomplished, like
adding user information to pg_dump, but it's one scenario anyway)
Actually the argument that you would have to do both a pg_dumpall of the
cluster and a pg_dump of each database in order to obtain this
functionality seems so user unfriendly it seems like something to persue
on those grounds alone (imho).
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-08-25 13:00:47 | Re: TODO questions |
Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-08-25 12:27:27 | Re: TODO questions |