From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump |
Date: | 2003-06-17 03:44:56 |
Message-ID: | 8962.1055821496@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Is there any point using pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump to generate trigger
> definitions? We'd still have to keep the old code so that we can dump pre
> 7.4, but it might mean we don't have to touch that code again if we add
> triggers on columns or something...
Seems like a good idea to me --- we've been trying to reduce pg_dump's
knowledge of backend nitty-gritty, and this would be another small step
in the right direction.
> Also, it doesn't format them as nicely as the current pg_dump code...
That's fixable no? I guess you might want to consider what psql's \d
display will look like too, but I don't recall that we ever promised
anyone that the pg_get_xxx functions would output no unnecessary
whitespace.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-06-17 03:53:34 | Re: pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-06-17 02:01:26 | pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump |