| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Laetitia Avrot <laetitia(dot)avrot(at)gmail(dot)com>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? |
| Date: | 2022-03-25 18:40:01 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbEA6nbMzTyNRKFNU8TAcQ0m4YzzZ+OAvrVg0NkVMysNA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, March 25, 2022, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> pg_dump never dumps system objects, so I don't see a need for
> >> a switch to tell it not to.
>
> > I considered pg_class to be a system object, which was dumped under -t
> '*'
>
> I'd vote for changing the behavior of --table rather than trying to
> be bug-compatible with this decision.
>
>
Agreed.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-25 18:46:59 | Re: Add non-blocking version of PQcancel |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-25 18:37:11 | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? |