| From: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(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: | 2019-02-03 07:12:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAKJS1f-YkJq1-fVuUSuAWTzoxdboOJj6G_Cd7WcMCoRSKDAKUw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 at 21:26, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
> I do not understand why dump_inserts declaration has left the "flags for
> options" section.
I moved that because it's no longer just a flag. It now stores an int value.
> I'd suggest not to rely on "atoi" because it does not check the argument
> syntax, so basically anything is accepted, eg "1O" is 1;
Seems like it's good enough for --jobs and --compress. Do you think
those should be changed too? or what's the reason to hold
--rows-per-insert to a different standard?
> There is a test, that is good! Charater "." should be backslashed in the
> regexpr.
Yeah, you're right. I wonder if we should fix the test of them in
another patch.
--
David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-02-03 07:14:13 | Re: Synchronize with imath upstream |
| Previous Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-02-03 07:09:53 | Re: Able to do ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES from a user who is not the owner |