Re: pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output

From: Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>
To: "Wang, Jing" <jingw(at)fast(dot)au(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output
Date: 2014-03-03 15:41:00
Message-ID: 5314A28C.6080307@timbira.com.br
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 27-02-2014 21:10, Wang, Jing wrote:
> Using pg_dump can dump the data into the file with format set to be
> 'c','t' or plain text. In the existing version the version of server &
> pg_dump is already there when the format of file is 'c' or 't'. And even
> for the plain text format file the version of server & pg_dump is
> already there if using '--verbose' in pg_dump. Using '--verbose' leads
> to some many other prints which are not required always.
>
I don't buy your argument. Why isn't verbose option sufficient? Did you
read the old thread about this [1]?

AFAICS a lot of people compare pg_dump diffs. If we apply this patch, it
would break those applications. Also, it is *already* available if you
add verbose option (which is sufficient to satisfy those that want the
client and/or server version) in plain mode (the other modes already
include the desired info by default). In the past, timestamps were
removed to avoid noise in diffs.

[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3677.1253912361@sss.pgh.pa.us

--
Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2014-03-03 15:43:46 Re: Custom Scan APIs (Re: Custom Plan node)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-03-03 15:38:02 Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation