On 11/18/18 1:41 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 11/17/18 9:55 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> The comment in expand_dbname_patterns is ungrammatical and mentions
>> "OID" rather than "name", so I suggest
>>
>> /*
>> * The loop below might sometimes result in duplicate entries in the
>> * output name list, but we don't care.
>> */
>
>
> Will fix.
>
>
>
>> I'm not sure this is grammatical either:
>> exclude databases whose name matches PATTERN
>> I would have written it like this:
>> exclude databases whose names match PATTERN
>> but I'm not sure (each database has only one name, of course, but aren't
>> you talking about multiple databases there?)
>
>
>
> I think the original is grammatical.
>
>
>
>> Other than that, the patch seems fine to me -- I tested and it works as
>> intended.
>>
>> Personally I would say "See also expand_table_name_patterns" instead of
>> "This is similar to code in pg_dump.c for handling matching table
>> names.",
>> as well as mention this function in expand_table_name_patterns' comment.
>> (No need to mention expand_schema_name_patterns, since these are
>> adjacent.) But this is mostly stylistic and left to your own judgement.
>>
>> In the long run, I think we should add an option to
>> processSQLNamePattern
>> to use OR instead of AND, which would fix both this problem as well as
>> pg_dump's. I don't think that's important enough to stall this patch.
>
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
>
>
Rebased and updated patch attached.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services