Re: Patch for pg_dump
| От | Dany DeBontridder |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Patch for pg_dump |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | c40e6c010703220219l73d20bd9gdc040108cc32f526@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Patch for pg_dump (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/21/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Well it was my first patch :-) So I suggest to use a generic argument like --object=function, which could be extended later to object=type, table, sequence, trigger... But now I have another problem: how to specify a name ?
regards,
D.
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I guess this matches this TODO item:
> o Allow selection of individual object(s) of all types, not just
> tables
(...)
Code-wise, the patch seems a bit of a mess too --- it will certainly not
scale up to dumping some functions and some other things, as one would
expect for instance if one said "pg_dump -Q myfunc -t mytab ...". It
doesn't even look like it will handle multiple -Q switches. I think a
minimum expectation is that -Q would work like -t now does.
Well it was my first patch :-) So I suggest to use a generic argument like --object=function, which could be extended later to object=type, table, sequence, trigger... But now I have another problem: how to specify a name ?
regards,
D.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: