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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-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

Attachment Content-Type Size
unknown_filename text/plain 3.9 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-03-08 17:01:02 Re: Index USING in pg_dump
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-03-08 16:35:11 Re: Index USING in pg_dump

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-03-08 17:01:02 Re: Index USING in pg_dump
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-03-08 16:35:11 Re: Index USING in pg_dump