| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_restore --format= option(without any value) should report an error as pg_dump is reporting an error |
| Date: | 2026-03-16 19:34:34 |
| Message-ID: | abhbSpewJZz0H999@nathan |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 10:32:11PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> Here, I am attaching an updated patch for the review. I removed the
> length check for host, port and format in pg_restore as we don't have
> check in pg_dump also.
Looks generally reasonable to me.
> I think we don't need any test cases for host and port.
Why not?
> If we want to backpatch, then I can make patches for back branches but
> as of now, I am uploading a patch for master only.
-1 for back-patching. --format seems to have been broken since pg_restore
was first committed in 2000 (commit 500b62b057), so I don't sense any
urgency here. Not to mention that someone might be relying on the current
behavior.
> +command_fails_like(
> + [ 'pg_restore', '-f -', '-F', 'p' ],
> + qr/\Qpg_restore: error: archive format "p" is not supported; please use psql\E/,
> + 'pg_restore: unrecognized archive format p|plain');
How does this test relate to this change?
--
nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-03-16 19:45:07 | Re: Improve OAuth discovery logging |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2026-03-16 19:34:12 | Re: Adding REPACK [concurrently] |