unsubscribe

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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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