Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?!
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?! |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7228.1328644567@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?! (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?!
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > On 01/31/2012 11:10 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Here's a possible patch for the exclude-table-data problem along the >> lines you suggest. > Should I apply this? I'm not happy with this yet. My core complaint is that pg_dump used to consider that creation of a TableDataInfo object for a table happens if and only if we're going to dump the table's data. And the comments (eg in pg_dump.h) still say that. But the previous patch left us in a halfway zone where sometimes we'd create a TableDataInfo object and then choose not to dump the data, and this patch doesn't get us out of that. I think we should either revert to the previous definition, or go over to a design wherein we always create TableDataInfo objects for all tables (but probably still excluding data-less relations such as views) and the whether-to-dump decision is expressed only by setting or not setting the object's dump flag. I worked a little bit on a patch to do the latter but found that it was more invasive than I'd hoped. Given the lack of any immediate payoff I think it'd probably make more sense to do the former. We could still centralize the decision making into makeTableDataInfo a bit more than now, but it should take the form of not creating the object at all, rather than creating it and then clearing its dump flag. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: