I have remove this TODO item:
* %Add pg_get_acldef(), pg_get_typedefault(), pg_get_attrdef(),
pg_get_tabledef(), pg_get_domaindef(), pg_get_functiondef()
These would be for application use, not for use by pg_dump.
Seems there is lack of interest in adding this feature because of
The attached patch is rejected for the same reason. Sorry for the
FAST PostgreSQL wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 02:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > > FAST PostgreSQL wrote:
> > >> Please find attached the patch with modifications
> > >
> > > are you proposing to implement the other functions in this TODO item
> > > (pg_get_acldef(), pg_get_typedefault(), pg_get_attrdef(),
> > > pg_get_tabledef(), pg_get_functiondef() ) ?
> > I haven't entirely understood the use case for any of these. It's not
> Any consensus on these functions? If we decide against having these then its
> better to remove them from the TODO list temporarily/permanently.........
> Arul Shaji
> > pg_dump, for a number of reasons: one being that pg_dump still has to
> > support older backend versions, and another being that every time we
> > let backend SnapshotNow functions get involved, we take another hit to
> > pg_dump's claim to produce a consistent MVCC snapshot.
> > But my real objection is: do we really want to support duplicative code
> > in both pg_dump and the backend? Updating pg_dump is already a major
> > PITA whenever one adds a new feature; doubling that work isn't
> > attractive. (And it'd be double, not just a copy-and-paste, because of
> > the large difference in the operating environment.) So I want to hear a
> > seriously convincing use-case that will justify the maintenance load we
> > are setting up for ourselves. "Somebody might want this" is not
> > adequate.
> > Perhaps a better area of work would be the often-proposed refactoring of
> > pg_dump into a library and driver program, wherein the library could
> > expose individual functions such as "fetch the SQL definition of this
> > object". Unfortunately, that'll be a huge project with no payoff until
> > the end...
> > regards, tom lane
> This is an email from Fujitsu Australia Software Technology Pty Ltd, ABN 27 003 693 481. It is confidential to the ordinary user of the email address to which it was addressed and may contain copyright and/or legally privileged information. No one else may read, print, store, copy or forward all or any of it or its attachments. If you receive this email in error, please return to sender. Thank you.
> If you do not wish to receive commercial email messages from Fujitsu Australia Software Technology Pty Ltd, please email unsubscribe(at)fast(dot)fujitsu(dot)com(dot)au
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2007-03-27 17:30:12|
|Subject: Re: Log levels for checkpoint/bgwriter monitoring|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2007-03-27 17:22:37|
|Subject: Re: Archive log compression keeping physical log
available in the crash recovery|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2007-03-27 17:32:00|
|Subject: Re: DEALLOCATE ALL|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2007-03-27 17:26:38|
|Subject: Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum|