From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, tomas(at)vondra(dot)me, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi |
Subject: | Re: add --sequence-data to pg_dumpall |
Date: | 2025-04-30 19:52:27 |
Message-ID: | aBJ_e5RXk92N5-U1@nathan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 09:29:59AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 03:55:08PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Assuming we want this patch, should we apply it to v18? It's arguably an
>> oversight in the pg_dump --sequence-data commit, and pg_dumpall will just
>> pass the option through to pg_dump, but otherwise there's not a really
>> strong reason it can't wait.
>
> This reminds me of, that fixed a similar defect in pg_dumpall
> following the addition of an option in pg_dump where the former was
> forgotten:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/YKHC%2BqCJvzCRVCpY%40paquier.xyz
>
> I agree with applying that to v18 now and treat it as a defect rather
> than wait for v19 and treat this patch as a new feature. Bonus points
> for the patch being straight-forward.
Since there's precedent, I'll plan on committing this in the next few days
unless someone objects. I've added the rest of the RMT to this thread,
too, just in case.
--
nathan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2025-04-30 20:00:01 | Re: Performance issues with v18 SQL-language-function changes |
Previous Message | Sami Imseih | 2025-04-30 19:43:41 | Re: Improve explicit cursor handling in pg_stat_statements |