Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEyMEaaY37_eMW76F97TX2voxdtPNkm3FGqN9c3ZHy3GMg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall
Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:03 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 04:52:06PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 4:14 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I'm curious why we couldn't also support the "custom" format.
>
> Or maybe even a combo - a directory of custom format files? Plus that one
> special file being globals? I'd say that's what most use cases I've seen
> would prefer.
Is there a particular advantage to that approach as opposed to just using
"directory" mode for everything? I know pg_upgrade uses "custom" mode for
each of the databases, so a combo approach would be a closer match to the
existing behavior, but that doesn't strike me as an especially strong
reason to keep doing it that way.
A gazillion files to deal with? Much easier to work with individual custom files if you're moving databases around and things like that. Much easier to monitor eg sizes/dates if you're using it for backups.
It's not things that are make-it-or-break-it or anything, but there are some smaller things that definitely can be useful.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: