Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Lætitia Avrot <laetitia(dot)avrot(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ryan Lambert <ryan(at)rustprooflabs(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, ahsan hadi <ahsan(dot)hadi(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?
Date: 2022-03-24 23:00:14
Message-ID: F9CA2AE0-ADFA-40B4-8EC0-6FDABF082968@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 24 Mar 2022, at 23:38, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:

> It looks like this discussion has reached a bit of an impasse with Tom
> being against this approach and Michael and Daniel being for it. It
> doesn't look like it's going to get committed this commitfest, shall
> we move it forward or mark it returned with feedback?

Lætitia mentioned the other day off-list that she was going to try and update
this patch with the pattern support proposed, so hopefully we will hear from
her shortly on that.

--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-03-24 23:18:33 Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-03-24 22:54:16 Re: SQL/JSON: JSON_TABLE