Re: -f
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: -f |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3963.1168103803@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: -f ("Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: -f
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org> writes: >> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> >> I think forking a separate >> pg_dump for each database is a perfectly fine arrangement, and should be >> left alone. > Hmm, would you be happy with my original proposal to add an append option to pg_dump? I don't object to it in principle, but I think a bit more thought is needed as to what's the goal. A stupid "append" option would be enough for pg_dumpall's current capabilities (ie, text output only) --- but is it reasonable to consider generalizing -Fc and -Ft modes to deal with multiple databases, and if so how would that need to change pg_dump's API? (I'm not at all sure this is feasible, but let's think about it before plastering warts onto pg_dump, not after.) > I'd also like to allow separate dumping of roles and tablespaces, and allow a default db to be specified instead of postgres/template1. Can't get excited about either, but no objection. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: