From: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump --split patch |
Date: | 2010-12-28 22:55:48 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinyw20vnYj8n899jtwh8vRmGn2AyLzgvXXiX75E@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/28/2010 04:44 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The problem I see with suffixing a sequence id to the objects with name
>>> collision is that one day the dump may name myfunc(int) as myfunc.sql and
>>> after an overloaded version is created, say myfunc(char, int), then the same
>>> myfunc(int) may be dumped in myfunc-2.sql, which again is non-deterministic.
>>>
>>
>> I agree, good point!
>> Perhaps abbreviations are to prefer, e.g., myfunc_i, myfunc_i_c, etc to
>> reduce the need of truncating filenames.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I think that's just horrible. Does the i stand for integer or inet? And it
> will get *really* ugly for type names with spaces in them ...
>
>
Do you mean using data type names in filename is a bad idea, or is
abbreviating the type names is a bad idea?
Maybe we can compute a hash based on the type names and use that in the
file's name?
Regards,
--
gurjeet.singh
@ EnterpriseDB - The Enterprise Postgres Company
http://www.EnterpriseDB.com
singh(dot)gurjeet(at){ gmail | yahoo }.com
Twitter/Skype: singh_gurjeet
Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karl Lehenbauer | 2010-12-28 22:56:23 | Revised patches to add table function support to PL/Tcl (TODO item) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-28 22:51:23 | Re: pg_dump --split patch |