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

Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)
Date: 2000-04-06 14:20:19
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000406072019.010dd1b0@mail.pacifier.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
At 01:37 PM 4/6/00 +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>>  this is not first letter about pg_dumplo which I head. What add pg_dumplo
>> to contrib or main tree?
>
>I probably haven't been paying attention. Have we heard about
>pg_dumplo? Have you posted it so we can see it?
>
>There is no fundamental problem including a utility like this in the
>main tree or the contrib/ area, but tell us more about it and show us
>the code! :)

If it runs as a separate utility, there's no way for it to guarantee
a dump consistent with the previous run of pg_dump, right?

While this is OK, one of the great things about 6.5 is the fact that
pg_dump now makes a consistent dump, you don't have to tear down all
your users before doing a backup.

So wouldn't it be better to fold pg_dumplo into pg_dump?



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
  Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
  Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
  http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-04-06 14:39:45
Subject: Re: 7.1 items
Previous:From: Vince VielhaberDate: 2000-04-06 13:52:58
Subject: pg_dump and serial

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-04-06 16:17:49
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)
Previous:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-04-06 13:49:15
Subject: Re: pg_dumplo, thanks :) (fwd)

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