Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 3481656.1648245290@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
| Ответы |
Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes:
>> On 25 Mar 2022, at 19:37, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'd vote for changing the behavior of --table rather than trying to
>> be bug-compatible with this decision.
> Agreed. Question is what to do for "-t pg_class", should we still forbid
> dumping system catalogs when they are pattern matched without wildcard or is
> should that be ok? And should this depend on if "-n pg_catalog" is used?
I don't think there's anything really wrong with just "we won't dump
system objects, full stop"; I don't see much use-case for doing that
except maybe debugging, and even that is a pretty thin argument.
However, a possible compromise is to say that we act as though
--exclude-schema=pg_catalog is specified unless you explicitly
override that with "--schema=pg_catalog". (And the same for
information_schema, I suppose.) This might be a bit hacky to
implement :-(
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: