Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
От | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently] |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJSLCQ38JzwVr+O1G9WhVw+G5MuECCD0T_e55097m9-gc2qfnQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently] (Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>) |
Ответы |
Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently]
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 4:21 PM Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br> wrote: > > Em qui., 25 de set. de 2025 às 15:12, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> escreveu: > > Some typos I've found on usage of pg_repackdb. > > + printf(_(" -n, --schema=SCHEMA repack tables in the specified schema(s) only\n")); > + printf(_(" -N, --exclude-schema=SCHEMA do not repack tables in the specified schema(s)\n")); > both options can point to a single schema, so "(s)" should be removed. > "in the specified schema(s)" should be "in the specified schema" > > Same occurs on this one, which should be table, not table(s) > + printf(_(" -t, --table='TABLE' repack specific table(s) only\n")); > This pattern is used because you can pass more than one argument, for example, something like pg_repackdb -d pagila -v -n public -n legacy While I agree that the wording is a little awkward; I'd prefer "repack tables only in the specified schema(s)"; but this follows the same pattern as pg_dump and friends. Robert Treat https://xzilla.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: