Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Index USING in pg_dump

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Index USING in pg_dump
Date: 2002-03-08 16:43:47
Message-ID: 200203081643.g28Ghl025690@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Yes, but it doesn't look like the way they created it.
> 
> (a) And you know that how?  (b) Are we also supposed to preserve
> spacing, keyword case, etc?  Not much of an argument...

Well, the USING part was confusing people because they didn't even know
we had other index types.  It is just an attempt to clean up pg_dump
output to be clearer.  One change I did make is to add a
DEFAULT_INDEX_TYPE macro and replace "btree" with the use of that macro
in a few places.

Here is a new patch.  I am moving the discussion to patches because of
the patch attachment.

How is this?  Comments from others?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-03-08 17:01:02
Subject: Re: Index USING in pg_dump
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-03-08 16:35:11
Subject: Re: Index USING in pg_dump

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2002-03-08 17:01:02
Subject: Re: Index USING in pg_dump
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-03-08 16:35:11
Subject: Re: Index USING in pg_dump

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group