| 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
| 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 |