Re: Conflicting option checking in pg_restore
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Conflicting option checking in pg_restore |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.21.1810281939470.5317@lancre обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Conflicting option checking in pg_restore (Narayanan V <vnarayanan.email@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Conflicting option checking in pg_restore
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Narayanan, >> There is a possible catch: >> >> Function RestoreArchive is called both from pg_dump & pg_restore, so now >> the sanity check is not performed for the former (which does not have the >> -1 option, though). Moreover, the function is noted "Public", which may >> suggest that external tools could take advantage of it, and if so it >> suggests that maybe it is not wise to remove the test. Any opinion around? > > [...] > > Wouldn't ropt->single_txn be undefined when called from pg_dump ? Yes, probably. > Unless I missed something here, I think it is logical to just move the > relevant code to pg_restore main. My point is that given the "Public" comment and that some care is taken to put everything in a special struct, I was wondering whether external tools may use this function, in which case the check would be left out. -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: