Re: pg_dump --with-* options
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_dump --with-* options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2ca8a35d-4bba-4529-88c1-3ca92dbc9e87@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_dump --with-* options (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_dump --with-* options
Re: pg_dump --with-* options |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 12.06.25 23:20, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Thu, 2025-06-12 at 21:16 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> Do we have other options that are order-sensitive? >> >> I think most of them are. For example: >> >> psql -p 5432 -p 5433 >> initdb --data-checksums --no-data-checksums >> postgres --shared-buffers=1GB --shared-buffers=2GB > > Interesting. I don't think the "last option wins" model applies to > other pg_dump options, though. For instance, in PG17: > > pg_dump --data-only --schema-only > pg_dump: error: options -s/--schema-only and -a/--data-only cannot be > used together > > I don't think it's simple to start using "last option wins" behavior > now. There are probably some combinations of options where it's not > clear whether a later option is an extra constraint or will override a > previous option. It makes sense to raise an error if the specified options cannot be consolidated in an obvious way. I'd expect pg_recvlogical --create-slot --drop-slot to fail, but I'd expect pg_recvlogical --create-slot --slot=foo --slot=bar to work. One of the challenges in the current case is that it is not obvious how --with-data, --no-data, --data-only etc. are connected. If that were clearer, then the way these options should combine or conflict would hopefully follow somewhat naturally.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: