Re: Possible changes to pg_restore

Tom Lane wrote:
> <hywel(at)hmallett(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
>
>> Would it be possible and worthwhile to add functionality to pg_restore so
>> that with one switch triggers/indexes/constraints could be ignored, and
>> with another switch only triggers/indexes/constraints would be restored?
>>
>
> You should probably go back and look at the archives from the last
> go-round on that. I believe it was during the 8.4 devel cycle.
> Somebody (might have been Simon, but not sure) submitted a patch for
> three-part output from pg_dump, it was discussed and sent back for
> revision, and the revision never materialized :-(. But IIRC there
> was reasonably clear consensus on what the feature ought to look like.
>
>
>

What is more, the changes done for parallel pg_restore actually did some
of the requisite work of classifying members, as can be seen in this
definition in pg_dump.h:

typedef enum _teSection
{
SECTION_NONE = 1, /* COMMENTs, ACLs, etc; can be
anywhere */
SECTION_PRE_DATA, /* stuff to be processed before data */
SECTION_DATA, /* TABLE DATA, BLOBS, BLOB COMMENTS */
SECTION_POST_DATA /* stuff to be processed after data */
} teSection;

Of course, you'd need to figure our how to handle the SECTION_NONE
entries, but other than that it should be pretty simple, I think.

cheers

andrew