| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Jim Cox <shakahshakah(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] 8.5 TODO: Add comments to output indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server |
| Date: | 2010-02-23 19:19:51 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071002231119u3fcddf20p1cb0abf7e47b44dc@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom Lane escribió:
>>> That would be an argument for sticking this in the next CF, not for
>>> applying it now --- it was submitted after the close of the last CF no?
>
>> Sep. 29 2009?
>
> Oh, I was thinking it had just come in recently, but looking back you're
> right. It did slip through the cracks.
>
> However, has the patch actually been reviewed? pg_dump is a piece of
> code where it is notoriously easy for novices to do things wrong,
> and this is especially true for adding output that should only come out
> in particular cases.
It's a fairly trivial patch. I took a quick look at it. It needs
more than that, but I think not too much more. I think it would be
less effort for someone to review it and make a decision than it would
be to keep it as an open item for the next 6 months. But that's just
MHO: if the consensus is to postpone it, then let's just do that and
move on.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2010-02-23 19:24:44 | Re: pg_stop_backup does not complete |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-23 19:02:58 | Re: function side effects |