Re: Dumping an Extension's Script

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dumping an Extension's Script
Date: 2012-12-06 00:33:02
Message-ID: 18778.1354753982@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> writes:
> In the patch we're talking about, the --extension-script is an
> accumulative option that needs an argument, so you do

> pg_dump --extension-script istore --extension-script foo

> or if you're into short options

> pg_dump -X istore -X foo -X bar

My reaction to this is "you've *got* to be kidding". You're going
to put it on the user to remember which extensions are which, or
else he gets an unusable dump? I don't think we should have a switch
like this at all. pg_dump should do the right thing for each extension
without being told.

And, once more, I think keeping the dump behavior for extensions as-is
and inventing a different concept for the script-file-substitutes would
be better than conflating the cases.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Janes 2012-12-06 00:35:00 Re: PITR potentially broken in 9.2
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-12-06 00:13:40 Re: Fwd: question on foreign key lock