| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_dump --with-* options |
| Date: | 2025-06-12 15:14:55 |
| Message-ID: | ad5175ba8abb9caec1fe59187ad7e54d3d24d797.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2025-06-12 at 15:47 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> My initial guess was that --with-data can override --no-data. That
> would have been pretty standard "last option wins" behavior. But
> pg_dump rejects that. Personally, I think that is kind of wrong.
Do we have other options that are order-sensitive?
> But in any case, if you want that level of precision, wouldn't it
> make
> more sense to use the --section option?
That's not possible with statistics, because some appear in
SECTION_DATA and some in SECTION_POST_DATA (e.g. stats on indexes,
which are in SECTION_POST_DATA).
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-06-12 15:17:55 | Re: pg_dump --with-* options |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-06-12 14:56:28 | Re: Replace some %llu remnants in the tree |