From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposed patch: make pg_dump --data-only consider FK constraints |
Date: | 2008-09-07 23:21:04 |
Message-ID: | 21727.1220829664@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> The other reason to think NOTICE might be better is that it's something which,
> if it occurs once, will always occur for that database. So a sysadmin will
> become inured to seeing WARNING on his backups. Are there any other warning
> conditions which could occur spontaneously that this would mask?
[ shrug ... ] Seems I'm outvoted, so NOTICE it will be.
> One minor thought -- surely the main use case for data-only dumps is for
> importing into another brand of database. In which case the message seems a
> bit awkward -- it could talk generically about disabling or dropping the
> constraints and then have a hint to indicate how to do that with Postgres.
I'm not convinced that data-only dumps are used mainly for that purpose.
In any case I don't want to turn this message into a paragraph;
mentioning all the things you might do about it in a Postgres context is
already making it longer than I would like...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2008-09-07 23:33:47 | Re: Proposed patch: make pg_dump --data-only consider FK constraints |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-09-07 22:39:28 | Re: Proposed patch: make pg_dump --data-only consider FK constraints |