From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "David F(dot) Skoll" <dfs(at)roaringpenguin(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option |
Date: | 2004-07-20 23:00:28 |
Message-ID: | 200407202300.i6KN0SN15276@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > (BTW, does the patch handle multiple -n switches?)
>
> No, it doesn't. I can look into that if you like. The patch was
> entirely to satisfy a need some of our customers have. The -T switch
> does fill a real need for our customers; our product has a couple of tables
> that aren't critical if they aren't backed up, but as the product evolves,
> we occasionally add more tables. So it's easier to use a -T switch to
> say what *not* to back up, than multiple -t switches to say what to back up.
Ah, I see in TODO:
* Allow pg_dump to use multiple -t and -n switches
so the problem with lack of multiple -n parameters was already known.
Should we allow -n to affect subsequent -t parameters, so:
-n schema1 -t tab1 -n schema2 -t tab2
does schema1.tab1 and schema2.tab2?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2004-07-20 23:06:20 | Re: check point segments leakage ? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-07-20 22:46:55 | Re: unused variable |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-07-20 23:03:31 | Re: win32 readline |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-07-20 22:56:55 | Re: FAQ_MSWIN patch |