Re: pg_dump DROP commands and implicit search paths

On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 01:42, Tom Lane wrote:
> nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
> > I'd prefer this method -- IMHO the readibility of dump scripts isn't
> > a top priority (or if it is, we're not doing very well in that regard
> > any). I think dump scripts should be as verbose as is necessary to
> > ensure that they can't be misinterpreted.

I agree with Neil on this.

> Perhaps instead of "readability" I should have said "editability".
> The thought that is lurking behind this is that you might want to
> retarget a dump script to be reloaded in some other schema. If the
> dump is cluttered with umpteen thousand copies of the schema name
> that's going to be difficult.

sed -e 's/ old_schema\./ new_schema./g'

I don't think you should allow the dump to be ambiguous for the sake of
making rarely used actions slightly more convenient.

> Ideally I'd like the dumped object definitions to contain *no* explicit
> references to their containing schema. This would allow, for example,
> a pg_restore mode that loads the objects into a different schema.

Provide a command line option to pg_restore to do an automatic edit of
the schema name (-E old_schema,new_schema). People using "psql <dump"
would have to edit the dump.

--
Oliver Elphick Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
Isle of Wight http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of
death, I will fear no evil, for thou art with me;
thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." Psalms 23:4