RE: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text
От | Imai, Yoshikazu |
---|---|
Тема | RE: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 0F97FA9ABBDBE54F91744A9B37151A512AB4F9@g01jpexmbkw24 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text (Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 10:55 PM, Euler Taveira wrote: > > Is there no need to rewrite the Description in the Doc to state we should > specify either -d or -f option? > > (and also it might be better to write if -l option is given, neither > > -d nor -f option isn't necessarily needed.) > > > I don't think so. The description is already there (see "pg_restore can > operate in two modes..."). I left -l as is which means that 'pg_restore > -l foo.dump' dumps to standard output and 'pg_restore -f - -l foo.dump' > has the same behavior). Ah, I understand it. > > I think the former one looks like pretty, but which one is preffered? > > > I don't have a style preference but decided to change to your suggestion. > New version attached. I checked it. It may be a trivial matter, so thanks for taking it consideration. -- Yoshikazu Imai
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: