2016-10-23 20:44 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>:
> 2016-10-23 20:37 GMT+02:00 Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>:
>
>> På søndag 23. oktober 2016 kl. 19:15:17, skrev Andreas Joseph Krogh <
>> andreas(at)visena(dot)com>:
>>
>> På søndag 23. oktober 2016 kl. 17:06:57, skrev Guillaume Lelarge <
>> guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>:
>>
>> 2016-03-08 21:06 GMT+01:00 Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com>:
>>>
>>> På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 21:03:01, skrev David G. Johnston <
>>> david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 17:38:04, skrev Joshua D. Drake <
>>>> jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>:
>>>>
>>>> On 03/08/2016 08:02 AM, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
>>>> > På tirsdag 08. mars 2016 kl. 16:57:01, skrev Tom Lane <
>>>> tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
>>>> > <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>>:
>>>> >
>>>> > Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com> writes:
>>>> > > What I'm looking for is "inverse -b" in an otherwise complete
>>>> > dump. Any plans
>>>> > > to add that?
>>>> >
>>>> > [ shrug... ] Nobody ever asked for it before.
>>>> >
>>>> > regards, tom lane
>>>> >
>>>> > It surely helps testing production-datasets which contain lots of
>>>> BLOBs
>>>> > where one wants to dump the production-data into a test-env. We have
>>>> > >1TB databases containing > 95% blobs so it would help us
>>>> tremendously
>>>> > to have this option.
>>>>
>>>> I have quite a few customers that would benefit from the ability to not
>>>> have blobs present in dumps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Great! So how do we proceed to get "--no-blobs" added to pg_dump?
>>>> Maybe CommandPrompt and Visena should co-fund development of such an
>>>> addition, if it's accepted by -hackers?
>>>> We'd be willing to pay for such an addition for the 9.5 branch, as a
>>>> patch.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this doesn't qualify as a bug fix - it is a new feature
>>> and thus is ineligible for inclusion in official 9.5
>>>
>>> David J.
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course. That's why I mentioned that, if possible, an unofficial patch
>>> to 9.5 could be developed, funded partly by Visena (my company). Given that
>>> someone is willing to do this of course.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That probably should look like the patch attached. It applies cleanly on
>> HEAD, and works AFAICT. If this patch seems interesting enough, I'll add it
>> to the next commit fest (note for myself, update the ref/pg_dump.sgml
>> documentation file).
>>
>> For Andreas' information, it also applies on 9.5, though I didn't check
>> if it worked afterwards.
>>
>>
>> +1 for adding it to the commitfest.
>>
>>
>>
> Done, https://commitfest.postgresql.org/11/833/
>
> It's almost scary how simple this patch is and noone ever got around to
>> implement it.
>>
>>
> Nobody had the time (like me, till now) or the motivation.
>
>
>>
>> Thanks, I'll test it on 9.5 soon.
>>
>>
>> It's totally OK for me to use 9.6 (now that it's released) to dump 9.5
>> DBs, so I'm all good with this patch, thanks!
>>
>
> Remember that, if it gets commited, it'll be for next release (aka 10),
> and not 9.6 and earlier.
>
>
New patch, this time with the documentation.
--
Guillaume.
http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info
http://www.dalibo.com