Re: pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <postgresql(at)mailpen(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster
Date: 2021-06-14 13:32:21
Message-ID: 197326.1623677541@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 6/10/21 2:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Ouch. That looks like a plain old bug. Let's fix it. IIRC I just used
>> the same logic that we use for pg_dump's --exclude-* options, so we need
>> to check if they have similar issues.

> Peter Eisentraut has pointed out to me that this is documented, albeit a
> bit obscurely for pg_dumpall. But it is visible on the pg_dump page.

Hmm.

> Nevertheless, it's a bit of a POLA violation as we've seen above, and
> I'd like to get it fixed, if there's agreement, both for this pg_dumpall
> option and for pg_dump's pattern matching options.

+1, but the -performance list isn't really where to hold that discussion.
Please start a thread on -hackers.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-06-14 13:39:12 Re: recent failures on lorikeet
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-06-14 13:21:30 pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-06-14 13:46:06 pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-06-14 13:21:30 pg_dumpall --exclude-database case folding, was Re: AWS forcing PG upgrade from v9.6 a disaster