| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Addition of pg_dump --no-publications |
| Date: | 2017-05-12 13:19:27 |
| Message-ID: | 26b22098-4dc6-6517-49a5-766e3443002f@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/11/17 21:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I imagine that pg_dump -s would be the basic operation that users
>> would do first before creating a subcription on a secondary node, but
>> what I find surprising is that publications are dumped by default. I
>> don't find confusing that those are actually included by default to be
>> consistent with the way subcriptions are handled, what I find
>> confusing is that there are no options to not dump them, and no
>> options to bypass their restore.
>>
>> So, any opinions about having pg_dump/pg_restore --no-publications?
>
> And that's really a boring patch, giving the attached.
committed
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | K S, Sandhya (Nokia - IN/Bangalore) | 2017-05-12 13:42:25 | Re: Crash observed during the start of the Postgres process |
| Previous Message | Neha Khatri | 2017-05-12 13:09:47 | Re: Time based lag tracking for logical replication |