| From: | "David F(dot) Skoll" <dfs(at)roaringpenguin(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T |
| Date: | 2004-07-20 12:23:46 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0407200821350.3377@shishi.roaringpenguin.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> (BTW, does the patch handle multiple -n switches?)
No, it doesn't. I can look into that if you like. The patch was
entirely to satisfy a need some of our customers have. The -T switch
does fill a real need for our customers; our product has a couple of tables
that aren't critical if they aren't backed up, but as the product evolves,
we occasionally add more tables. So it's easier to use a -T switch to
say what *not* to back up, than multiple -t switches to say what to back up.
Regards,
David.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-20 12:32:00 | Re: localhost redux |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-20 12:18:48 | Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-20 12:51:54 | Re: PITR COPY Failure (was Point in Time Recovery) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-20 12:18:48 | Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option |