| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreak(at)officenet(dot)no>, Enrico <scotty(at)linuxtime(dot)it>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgdump |
| Date: | 2005-01-17 05:54:22 |
| Message-ID: | 23360.1105941262@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 00:24 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> A little further down-thread there was some discussion of also allowing
>> wild cards in the individual switches,
> Is this actually useful behavior?
Possibly not. It's been requested often enough, but multiple -t and -n
switches might be sufficient.
>> * what about quoting/downcasing rules?
> If we don't implement wildcards, I don't believe we will need to change
> the present behavior of the "-n" and "-t" switches WRT case conversion
> etc.
I'm not sure you can ignore the issue completely. The proposal you're
supporting included being able to pick out a specific table with
-t s1.t1
and without any quoting rules it would then become impossible to deal
with names containing dots. Are we willing to blow off that case?
Or is it better to drop that part of the proposal?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-01-17 06:09:10 | Re: pgdump |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-01-17 05:52:56 | Re: IBM releases 500 patents |