| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> | 
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Erik Wienhold <ewie(at)ewie(dot)name>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump --no-comments confusion | 
| Date: | 2024-11-18 22:14:53 | 
| Message-ID: | 3495698.1731968093@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> writes:
> But it would be good to have this patch applied to all supported versions,
> as soon as nothing was changed on that pg_dump option, no ?
Even more to the point, should we change pg_dump's help output?
...
  --load-via-partition-root    load partitions via the root table
  --no-comments                do not dump comments
  --no-publications            do not dump publications
...
Also, the identical text appears in pg_dumpall's man page and help
output, while pg_restore has a differently worded version:
printf(_(" --no-comments do not restore comments\n"));
pg_restore's man page seems OK though:
        Do not output commands to restore comments, even if the archive
        contains them.
Note: I would not argue for back-patching changes in the help output,
as that creates translation issues.  So probably back-patching the
SGML changes isn't appropriate either.  But we should make all of this
consistent in master.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-11-18 22:56:19 | UNION versus collations | 
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2024-11-18 22:07:44 | Re: pg_dump --no-comments confusion |