Re: pg_dump/restore syntax checking bug?

From: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump/restore syntax checking bug?
Date: 2013-03-23 05:13:00
Message-ID: CAK3UJRH6SAvyH47VOxbDtfFkc+XoFnmRTZDK+TRKbC5DOnV+-w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

> postgres(at)jd-laptop:~$ pg_restore -d test -P 'by(),hello()' foo.sqlc

Note, the pg_restore doc makes no mention of trying to squeeze
multiple function prototypes in a single argument you've done here, or
of using multiple -P flags.

> It appears we need better syntax checking.

Can't really argue with this. But if you think these pg_restore
examples are bad, try this gem:
reindexdb --table='foo; ALTER ROLE limited WITH superuser'

Josh

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sergey Konoplev 2013-03-23 07:37:47 timeofday() and clock_timestamp() produce different results when casting to timestamptz
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2013-03-23 04:57:45 Re: Let's invent a function to report lock-wait-blocking PIDs