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

Re: pg_dump --split patch

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, David Wilson <david(dot)t(dot)wilson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: pg_dump --split patch
Date: 2010-12-29 01:51:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12/28/2010 08:18 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> 2010/12/29 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us <mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>>
>     If you've solved the deterministic-ordering problem, then this entire
>     patch is quite useless.  You can just run a normal dump and diff it.
> No, that's only half true.
> Diff will do a good job minimizing the "size" of the diff output, yes, 
> but such a diff is still quite useless if you want to quickly grasp 
> the context of the change.
> If you have a hundreds of functions, just looking at the changed 
> source code is not enough to figure out which functions were modified, 
> unless you have the brain power to memorize every single line of code 
> and are able to figure out the function name just by looking at the 
> old and new line of codes.


  diff -F '^CREATE' ...



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Karl LehenbauerDate: 2010-12-29 02:23:58
Subject: Re: Revised patches to add table function support to PL/Tcl (TODO item)
Previous:From: Joel JacobsonDate: 2010-12-29 01:18:46
Subject: Re: pg_dump --split patch

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