| From: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com | 
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Pet Peeves? | 
| Date: | 2009-01-30 17:20:37 | 
| Message-ID: | 498336E5.7050207@pinpointresearch.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
> You can however pull it from a -Fc backup with pg_restore. Just FYI.
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>   
Or strip it from a pg_dump/pg_dumpall with sed. Or write your own 
function-dumper based on ideas gleaned from various notes/comments on 
the web (my approach).
I had not thought of using the -Fc approach but it appears that that 
would require dumping the whole database then using pg_restore to pull 
the function definition from the dump.
One other thing that would be nice to have for function-dumping whether 
in pg_dump or using the -Fc approach would be the ability to dump all 
functions of a given name instead of having to go one-by-one. It's 
pretty unusual for identically-named functions to have unrelated purposes.
Cheers,
Steve
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sam Mason | 2009-01-30 17:31:55 | Re: Pet Peeves? | 
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2009-01-30 17:06:50 | Re: Pet Peeves? |