Re: Documentation clarification request: pg_dumpall and Large Objects

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: "Radoulov, Dimitre" <cichomitiko(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Documentation clarification request: pg_dumpall and Large Objects
Date: 2026-03-29 17:55:11
Message-ID: 1844992.1774806911@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs

Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> Commit 763aaa06f0 has changed the situation: with the addition of other formats
> than the plain format, it no longer makes sense to say that pg_dumpall
> is not useful for backup. Still, we should clarify what is *not* included.

> The attached patch does that and in passing improves the readability.

Pushed with trivial grammatical adjustments. I also failed to resist
the temptation to improve the newly-added text nearby.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Laurenz Albe 2026-03-29 18:12:17 Re: Documentation clarification request: pg_dumpall and Large Objects
Previous Message Clodoaldo Pinto 2026-03-29 13:39:08 Themed offline HTML docs