From: | "Stevenson, Bob" <BobStevenson(at)officemax(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | unsubscribe |
Date: | 2006-10-06 14:30:51 |
Message-ID: | 5B51B7761BF9B949A2EC5BB06EB6734507F07B7F@ITAM1EVS1.officemax.omx.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
unsubscribe
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Markus Schaber
Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 3:34 AM
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types
Hi, Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
> One issue is what to do with procedural languages and large objects,
> which don't have any associated schema. If we treat them as being
> outside all schemas, we'd have semantics like this: dump the PLs and
> blobs unless one or more --schema switches appeared. Is that OK?
Sounds fine.
Is there a possibility to dump only those objects? Maybe --large-objects
and --languages?
Thanks,
Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS
Fight against software patents in Europe! www.ffii.org
www.nosoftwarepatents.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-06 14:40:03 | Re: PL/pgSQL Todo, better information in errcontext from plpgsql |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-06 14:30:01 | Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types |