Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 603c8f071002231119u3fcddf20p1cb0abf7e47b44dc@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output
indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server
Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: >> Tom Lane escribió: >>> That would be an argument for sticking this in the next CF, not for >>> applying it now --- it was submitted after the close of the last CF no? > >> Sep. 29 2009? > > Oh, I was thinking it had just come in recently, but looking back you're > right. It did slip through the cracks. > > However, has the patch actually been reviewed? pg_dump is a piece of > code where it is notoriously easy for novices to do things wrong, > and this is especially true for adding output that should only come out > in particular cases. It's a fairly trivial patch. I took a quick look at it. It needs more than that, but I think not too much more. I think it would be less effort for someone to review it and make a decision than it would be to keep it as an open item for the next 6 months. But that's just MHO: if the consensus is to postpone it, then let's just do that and move on. ...Robert
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: