Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2745562.1726942969@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ? (Florents Tselai <florents.tselai@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Florents Tselai <florents.tselai@gmail.com> writes: > Ah, swapped them by mistake on the previous email: > They're both available in the pg_dump and note on -n missing in pg_restore. > The question remains though: > Shouldn’t there be a note about -n in pg_restore ? Probably. I see that pg_dump has a third copy of the exact same note for "-e". pg_restore lacks that switch for some reason, but this is surely looking mighty duplicative. I propose getting rid of the per-switch Notes and putting a para into the Notes section, along the lines of When -e, -n, or -t is specified, pg_dump makes no attempt to dump any other database objects that the selected object(s) might depend upon. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the results of a selective dump can be successfully restored by themselves into a clean database. and mutatis mutandis for pg_restore. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: