<p dir="ltr"><br /> On Aug 28, 2012 9:59 PM, "Tom Lane" <<a
href="mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us">tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > Magnus Hagander <<a
href="mailto:magnus@hagander.net">magnus@hagander.net</a>>writes:<br /> > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:42 PM,
TomLane <<a href="mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us">tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us</a>> wrote:<br /> > >> I don't see
anythingparticularly incorrect about that. The point of<br /> > >> the --verbose switch is to track what
pg_dumpis doing, and if what<br /> > >> it's doing involves going through RestoreArchive(), why should we
try<br/> > >> to hide the fact?<br /> ><br /> > > "restoring data for table 't'" makes you think it's
actuallrestoring<br /> > > things. It's not. That dumping is implemented by calling an internal<br /> > >
functioncalled RestoreArchive() has to be an implementation detail...<br /> > > It certainly confuses users that
wesay "restoring" when we're not<br /> > > doing that...<br /> ><br /> > Well, why don't we just
s/restoring/processing/in the debug message,<br /> > and call it good?<p dir="ltr">Sure, that would work for me... I
cango do that if there are no objections.<br /><p dir="ltr">/Magnus