| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump |
| Date: | 2017-09-01 16:53:28 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYV6b6wieitt=3Sv1bmMFbGZcNpQ6oyv9WoHtHadu1-Ow@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Thinking ahead, are we going to add a new --no-objecttype switch every
> time someone wants it?
I'd personally be fine with --no-whatever for any whatever that might
be a subsidiary property of database objects. We've got
--no-security-labels, --no-tablespaces, --no-owner, and
--no-privileges already, so what's wrong with --no-comments?
(We've also got --no-publications; I think it's arguable whether that
is the same kind of thing.)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2017-09-01 16:57:03 | Rename RECOVERYXLOG to RECOVERYWAL? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-09-01 16:49:28 | Re: Missing SIZE_MAX |