| From: | rafael <r(dot)m(dot)guerrero(at)usit(dot)uio(dot)no> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump |
| Date: | 2015-10-30 13:57:30 |
| Message-ID: | 5633774A.4050909@usit.uio.no |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/29/2015 03:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> We don't need hasty patches. What we need is a re-think of the division
> of labor between pg_dump and pg_dumpall. Up to now, pg_dump has only been
> charged with dumping/restoring the data "inside" an individual database,
> not with handling any database-level properties. Those are the
> responsibility of pg_dumpall.
>
Hello
A wiki page with some proposals to improve pg_dump can be found here:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Pg_dump_improvements
It was created sometime ago after a discussion on pgsql-hackers. Refs on
the wikipage.
regards
--
Rafael Martinez Guerrero
Center for Information Technology
University of Oslo, Norway
PGP Public Key: http://folk.uio.no/rafael/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Victor Wagner | 2015-10-30 14:09:47 | Re: Patch: Implement failover on libpq connect level. |
| Previous Message | Erik Rijkers | 2015-10-30 13:53:53 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |