Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT
Date: 2019-01-18 14:43:01
Message-ID: CAKFQuwbRaV5yqsJtMK1SxVVYQXet_LTVy-iWHQSvEa2tWOtnSg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 4:47 AM Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
> ISTM that command-line switches with optional arguments should be avoided:
> This feature is seldom used (hmmm... 2 existing instances), because it
> interferes with argument processing if such switches are used as the last
> one.

Excellent point; though avoiding adding yet another limited-use option
seems like a fair trade-off here. Though maybe we also need to add
the traditional "--" option as well. I'm not married to the idea
though; but its also not like mis-interpreting the final argument as
an integer instead of a database is going to be a silent error.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2019-01-18 14:50:40 Re: current_logfiles not following group access and instead follows log_file_mode permissions
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2019-01-18 14:34:35 Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT