Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Date: 2019-10-06 21:02:49
Message-ID: 875zl11tla.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

Tom> Perhaps we could change the back branches so that they interpret
Tom> "-f -" as "write to stdout", but without enforcing that you use
Tom> that syntax.

We should definitely do that.

Tom> Alternatively, we could revert the v12 behavior change. On the
Tom> whole that might be the wiser course. I do not think the costs and
Tom> benefits of this change were all that carefully thought through.

Failing to specify -d is a _really fricking common_ mistake for
inexperienced users, who may not realize that the fact that they're
seeing a ton of SQL on their terminal is not the normal result.
Seriously, this comes up on a regular basis on IRC (which is why I
suggested initially that we should do something about it).

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-10-06 21:15:24 Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-10-06 20:43:13 Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-10-06 21:15:24 Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-10-06 20:43:13 Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-