Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump
Date: 2018-01-24 19:09:00
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I'm afraid we may still get some push-back from existing users of
> --clean since, with the change you're proposing, we wouldn't be cleaning
> up anything that's been done to the public schema when it comes to
> comment changes or ACL changes, right?

No, if you have a nondefault ACL, that will still get applied. This
arrangement would drop comment changes, but I can't get excited about
that; it's certainly far less of an inconvenience in that scenario
than dumping the comment is in non-superuser-restore scenarios.

regards, tom lane

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-01-24 19:20:48 Re: WIP Patch: Precalculate stable functions, infrastructure v1
Previous Message Chapman Flack 2018-01-24 18:48:05 Re: Would a BGW need shmem_access or database_connection to enumerate databases?