From: | "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | 'Euler Taveira' <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, "Andrew Gierth" <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text |
Date: | 2019-03-18 00:21:50 |
Message-ID: | 0F97FA9ABBDBE54F91744A9B37151A512AB4F9@g01jpexmbkw24 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 10:55 PM, Euler Taveira 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.)
> >
> I don't think so. The description is already there (see "pg_restore can
> operate in two modes..."). I left -l as is which means that 'pg_restore
> -l foo.dump' dumps to standard output and 'pg_restore -f - -l foo.dump'
> has the same behavior).
Ah, I understand it.
> > I think the former one looks like pretty, but which one is preffered?
> >
> I don't have a style preference but decided to change to your suggestion.
> New version attached.
I checked it. It may be a trivial matter, so thanks for taking it consideration.
--
Yoshikazu Imai
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hugh Ranalli | 2019-03-18 00:23:05 | Re: Unaccent extension python script Issue in Windows |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-18 00:14:56 | Re: Make pg_checksums complain if compiled BLCKSZ and data folder's block size differ |