From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Remove pg_dump -i option (was Re: Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable) |
Date: | 2008-02-05 18:11:41 |
Message-ID: | 47A8A6DD.2000208@hagander.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Dave Page wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2008 3:27 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:02:03AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> I would be satisfied with that if I thought people would actually read
>>>> the message. My complaint is really directed at certain admin packages
>>>> (and they know who they are) that invoke pg_dump *by default*, behind
>>>> the user's back, with -i.
>>> Oh? That isn't good.
>> Right. Dave - why do we do that? ;-)
>
> I didn't realise we did until Tom mentioned it - I didn't write that code.
>
> Please go ahead and remove the -i - it's not like users cannot cannot
> specify which set of pg utilities to use if they need a specific
> version.
Ok, done!
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-02-05 18:12:27 | Re: GSSAPI and V2 protocol |
Previous Message | Kris Jurka | 2008-02-05 18:06:01 | Re: GSSAPI and V2 protocol |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2008-02-05 19:45:21 | Re: Remove pg_dump -i option (was Re: Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable) |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2008-02-05 16:18:29 | Re: Remove pg_dump -i option (was Re: Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUC variable) |