Re: 7.3 Beta Schema and pg_dump

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jim(at)contactbda(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7.3 Beta Schema and pg_dump
Date: 2002-09-17 05:29:00
Message-ID: 200209170529.g8H5T0w28616@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > "Jim Buttafuoco" <jim(at)contactbda(dot)com> writes:
> > > This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
> > > If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?
> >
> > I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
> > features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?
>
> I don't see a huge reason to stick to that rule in this instance...

Reclassify it as a bug ... problem solved. ;-)

Actually, it is sort of a bug because it is something we should have
added for schemas but forgot.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-09-17 05:32:23 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-17 05:19:38 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?