| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no>, Enrico <scotty(at)linuxtime(dot)it>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgdump |
| Date: | 2005-01-17 05:43:18 |
| Message-ID: | 1105940598.22946.32.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 00:24 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> A little further down-thread there was some discussion of also allowing
> wild cards in the individual switches, eg
>
> -t 's1.*'
>
> (This would differ from '-n s1' in that a -t switch would restrict the
> dump to tables only, whereas -n should take every sort of object in the
> selected schema.)
Is this actually useful behavior? My gut feeling is "no", but I'm open
to debate. ISTM that the combination of "-n" and "-t" achieves a pretty
wide swath of the desired functionality. Considering that the various
combinations of these switches is already quite complex, I think it
would be wise to avoid additional, unnecessary complications. Plus it
avoids the need to play games with escaping the wildcard from the shell.
> * what about quoting/downcasing rules?
If we don't implement wildcards, I don't believe we will need to change
the present behavior of the "-n" and "-t" switches WRT case conversion
etc.
-Neil
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-01-17 05:52:56 | Re: IBM releases 500 patents |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-17 05:24:07 | Re: pgdump |