On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 14:08 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:43 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> That line of argument leads to the suggestion that pg_dump should just
> >> use something else (I'd vote for "|"), all the time, in order to produce
> >> more robust dump files. I still don't see the argument for exposing
> >> a switch though.
> > If we regard them as suitable for human editing for normal use, yes.
> No, that actually was no part of my point. A pg_dump file that doesn't
> use tabs is more likely to survive being emailed, for instance. I'm not
> sure whether that is a large enough consideration to justify a change,
> but you don't have to assume that anyone's intending to edit anything
> to make the argument for it.
Not sure how much that matters in these days of MIME, but it's a fair
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Greg Stark||Date: 2006-01-27 22:04:09|
|Subject: Re: Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2006-01-27 19:08:26|
|Subject: Re: Proposal: new pg_dump options --copy-delimiter and |