From: | Martin Pitt <mpitt(at)debian(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Adding an ignore list to pg_restore, prototype patch #1 |
Date: | 2006-02-25 12:46:48 |
Message-ID: | 20060225124648.GA6968@piware.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi again,
Martin Pitt [2006-02-19 14:39 +0100]:
> Since this changes the behaviour of pg_restore, this should probably
> become an option, e. g. -D / --ignore-existing-table-data. I'll do
> this if you agree to the principle of the current patch.
I improved the patch now to only ignore TABLE DATA for existing tables
if '-X ignore-existing-tables' is specified. I also updated the
documentation.
Since this doesn't change the default behaviour now any more, I would
like to put this patch into the Debian packages to provide automatic
upgrades for PostGIS-enabled databases (see [1]). Does anyone object
to this?
Do you consider to adopt this upstream?
Thanks in advance, and have a nice weekend!
Martin
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/351571
--
Martin Pitt http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com
Debian Developer http://www.debian.org
In a world without walls and fences, who needs Windows and Gates?
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
13-pg_restore-ignore-existing-tables.patch | text/plain | 3.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-02-25 13:02:15 | Re: What's with this lib suffix? |
Previous Message | Thomas Hallgren | 2006-02-25 12:17:56 | What's with this lib suffix? |