Re: pg_restore ignores -C when using a restore list -L
От | Russell Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_restore ignores -C when using a restore list -L |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4BEE6705.1060902@pws.com.au обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_restore ignores -C when using a restore list -L (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 15/05/10 03:26, Tom Lane wrote: > Russell Smith <mr-russ@pws.com.au> writes: > >>> By the operation of other items (-C --data-only) passed with -l, it only >>> produces to contents that would be restored with the other switches >>> provided. If that's expect behavior, then the documentation of the >>> switch is incorrect and should read something more like >>> >>> -l >>> --list List the items in the archive that would be restored >>> taking into account any other switches provided. The output of this >>> operation can be used with the -L option to further restrict and >>> reorder the items that are restored. >>> > Yeah, -l is limited by other filtering switches, and this definitely > ought to be stated more clearly in the documentation. (The content > of the produced file implies it, since it says *Selected* TOC Entries, > but that's hardly clear enough.) > > >> Further to these comments, both scenarios should make -l or -L >> incompatibe with -C --data-only -I -n --schema-only -T -t -x as all >> these alter the contents of what is restored. You should either use the >> list to control the items restored or the switches. Using both just >> created confusion. >> > I believe that allowing the filter switches to act on -l is a useful > behavior, and anyway it's been like that for many years and nobody's > complained before. So I'm not excited about taking out the > functionality. > > However, I think -C is a special case because it's quite un-obvious > to the user that it effectively acts as a filter switch --- in fact a > de-filtering switch, because the lack of -C is what filters out the > DATABASE item. > > I'm inclined to think that we should document that the output of -l > is restricted by -n and similar switches, but change the code so that > -C doesn't affect -l output. Comments? > Sounds good. -L could do with some man page help as well; --use-list=list-file Restore elements in list-file only, and in the order they appear in the file. Lines can be moved and can also be commented out by placing a ; at the start of the line. (See below for examples.) That indicates that "list-file only" lacks clarity when you can further restrict with command line parameters. Thanks Russell
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: