Re: Feature Proposal: schema renaming in pg_dump/pg_restore

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Brad Arndt <brad(dot)arndt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Lance Hoover <lance(at)mydatamove(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Feature Proposal: schema renaming in pg_dump/pg_restore
Date: 2025-11-30 16:58:01
Message-ID: 814076.1764521881@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Brad Arndt <brad(dot)arndt(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> *My Proposal:*
> Build in the ability to rename schemas as part of pg_dump (and to a lesser
> extent pg_restore - more on that below) by adding a --rename-schema flag.

This has been proposed before, and the discussions always foundered
on the fact that pg_dump has no understanding of the contents of
function bodies. For that matter it doesn't really understand
the contents of views, default expressions, etc either. So any such
feature would be dangerously incomplete: it'd not be very much safer
than just doing a string substitution on "pg_dump -s" output.

I concede that it could be useful anyway to some people in some
use-cases, but we don't generally like to put development and support
effort into things that would have to come with big red warning flags.
Inevitably, people would use the feature carelessly, shoot themselves
in the foot, and complain to us about it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Lakhin 2025-11-30 17:00:01 Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY
Previous Message Mihail Nikalayeu 2025-11-30 16:52:00 Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY