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

Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?!

From: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: depesz(at)depesz(dot)com
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?!
Date: 2012-01-30 17:43:46
Message-ID: 4F26D6D2.10507@gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On 01/30/2012 09:23 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski wrote:

>
> I think I explained it in previous mails, and if not - sorry, but
> I clearly can't explain good enough - the point is that with the way how
> extensions now work, they are useless for providing way to create
> tables that will store data, in case you would ever want dump without
> this data.

So in summary; if an extension creates a user table you want access to 
that table(schema and data) via pg_dump, outside the extension 
mechanism, without resorting to marking it as a configuration table. Is 
that correct ?


>
> Best regards,
>
> depesz
>
>


-- 
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: hubert depesz lubaczewskiDate: 2012-01-30 17:45:09
Subject: Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?!
Previous:From: hubert depesz lubaczewskiDate: 2012-01-30 17:28:59
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable?

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: hubert depesz lubaczewskiDate: 2012-01-30 17:45:09
Subject: Re: pg_dump -s dumps data?!
Previous:From: hubert depesz lubaczewskiDate: 2012-01-30 17:28:59
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable?

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