Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and more

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: terry(at)terrym(dot)com (Terry Mackintosh)
Cc: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump and more
Date: 1998-10-07 02:50:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Hi Jan and all
> On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Jan Wieck wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> >     Bruce: Would you please apply the patch at the end?
> > 
> >     Terry: Sorry, but dumping views is covered completely by this
> >     approach for dumping rewrite rules.
> Sounds good, I really don't mind that what I did does not get used.
> For it seems that I blow on the right coal and a fire started.

I like this sentence.

> Dumping of views and such has been lacking for WAY TOO LONG.
> And it sounds like even more came out of all of this then any of us would
> have thought.

Yes, though I knew Jan had this up his sleeve, and it was on the open
items list.

I have removed the mention of the rules limitation in pg_dump man pages
and sgml.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1998-10-07 03:20:58
Subject: Open 6.4 items
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1998-10-07 02:41:21
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] RE: [GENERAL] Long update query ? (also Re: [GENERAL] CNF vs. DNF)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group