| 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 06:19:36 |
| Message-ID: | 23582.1105942776@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:
> So the behavior would be that suggested earlier by David Skoll:
>> pg_dump -t t1 -- Dump table t1 in any schema
>> pg_dump -n s1 -- Dump all of schema s1
>> pg_dump -t t1 -n s1 -- Dump t1 in s1
>> pg_dump -t t1 -t t2 -n s1 -- Dump s1.t1 and s1.t2
>> pg_dump -t t1 -t t2 -n s1 -n s2 -- Dump s1.t1, s1.t2, s2.t1 and s2.t2
Well, that at least obeys the KISS principle ;-). Sure, let's try that
and see if it satisfies people.
Just to be clear: what I understand the logic to be is "OR" across
multiple switches of the same type, but "AND" across switches of
two types.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-01-17 06:46:39 | Re: pgdump |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-17 06:15:25 | ARC patent |