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: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | 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 |