Re: Review: check existency of table for -t option (pg_dump) when pattern...

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Review: check existency of table for -t option (pg_dump) when pattern...
Date: 2015-09-12 06:52:13
Message-ID: CAFj8pRCXPZc8xc4n_mv-AAaC5XVYN=pWmALrbuNim2PQdak0qw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi

2015-09-11 17:59 GMT+02:00 Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>:

> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/6/201/
>
> Patch looks good and is helpful in some usecases. I found and fix some
> typo (new version in attach), but patch shows some inconsistent output:
> % pg_dump -t 'aaa*' postgres
> pg_dump: No matching tables were found
> % pg_dump -t 'aaa*' --strict-names postgres
> pg_dump: Table "aaa*" not found.
>
> In second case error message is obviously worse.
>

There are two different situation - first message says "there are not any
table for work", second says "There are not specific table(s) with specific
names (mask)". I am thinking so this information is enough interesting for
showing.

Can be changed to "No matching table(s) were found for filter "aaa*" " ?

Regards

Pavel

> --
> Teodor Sigaev E-mail: teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru
> WWW:
> http://www.sigaev.ru/
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sameer Thakur-2 2015-09-12 08:32:37 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Previous Message Takashi Horikawa 2015-09-12 04:28:47 Re: Partitioned checkpointing