RE: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text

Hi Jose,

Sorry for my late reply.

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:58 AM, José Arthur Benetasso Villanova wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019, Imai, Yoshikazu wrote:
>
> > Is there no need to rewrite the Description in the Doc to state we should
> specify either -d or -f option?
> > (and also it might be better to write if -l option is given, neither
> > -d nor -f option isn't necessarily needed.)
>
> Since the default part of text was removed, looks ok to me.

Ah, yeah, after looking again, I also think it's ok.

> > I also have the simple question in the code.
> >
> > I thought the below if-else condition
> >
> > + if (filename && strcmp(filename, "-") == 0)
> > + fn = fileno(stdout);
> > + else if (filename)
> > fn = -1;
> > else if (AH->FH)
> >
> > can also be written by the form below.
> >
> > if (filename)
> > {
> > if(strcmp(filename, "-") == 0)
> > fn = fileno(stdout);
> > else
> > fn = -1;
> > }
> > else if (AH->FH)
> >
> > I think the former one looks like pretty, but which one is preffered?
>
> Aside the above question, I tested the code against a up-to-date
> repository. It compiled, worked as expected and passed all tests.

It still can be applied to HEAD by cfbot.

Upon committing this, we have to care this patch break backwards compatibility, but I haven't seen any complaints so far. If there are no objections, I will set this patch to ready for committer.

--
Yoshikazu Imai