Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David Fetter
Тема Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types
Дата
Msg-id 20061008012219.GH9928@fetter.org
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:28:21PM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> 
> > The existing patch's behavior is that "the rightmost switch wins",
> > ie, if an object's name matches more than one pattern then it is
> > included or excluded according to the rightmost switch it matches.
> > This is, erm, poorly documented, but it seems like useful behavior
> > so I don't have an objection myself.
> 
> I don't know, it sounds like it's the source of the confusion you
> identify later.
> 
> My first thought is that the rule should be to apply all the
> inclusion switches (implicitly including everything if there are
> none), then apply all the exclusion switches.

+1 :)

Order-dependent switches are a giant foot gun.

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666                             Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Sergey E. Koposov"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: FailedAssertion() in 8.2beta1
Следующее
От: Yourfriend
Дата:
Сообщение: The improvement for psql of 8.2beta1 not implemented under Windows