On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>> I'd personally be fine with --no-whatever for any whatever that might
>>>> be a subsidiary property of database objects. We've got
>>>> --no-security-labels, --no-tablespaces, --no-owner, and
>>>> --no-privileges already, so what's wrong with --no-comments?
>>>>
>>>> (We've also got --no-publications; I think it's arguable whether that
>>>> is the same kind of thing.)
>>>
>>> And --no-subscriptions in the same bucket.
>>
>> Yes, it is. I was suggesting that we remove those as well.
FWIW, I do too. They are useful for given application code paths.
> That seems like a non-starter to me. I have used those options many
> times to solve real problems, and I'm sure other people have as well.
> We wouldn't have ended up with all of these options if users didn't
> want to control such things.
As there begins to be many switches of this kind and much code
duplication, I think that some refactoring into a more generic switch
infrastructure would be nicer.
--
Michael