Re: -f option for pg_dumpall - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: -f option for pg_dumpall
Date
Msg-id 1168544202.5462.7.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: -f option for pg_dumpall  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: -f option for pg_dumpall  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 17:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think this will be an exercise in time-wasting, and very possibly
> destabilize *both* tools.  pg_dump has never been designed to reconnect
> to a different database; for instance there isn't any code for resetting
> all the internal state that it gathers.

That is merely an implementation issue. The question of whether pg_dump
and pg_dumpall should be separate programs is a question of design,
IMHO.

I don't think they need to be integrated any time soon, but if we were
to design pg_dump and pg_dumpall from scratch, it seems more logical to
use a single program, and therefore that is the long-term direction I
think we should head in.

-Neil




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: wal buffers documentation -errata
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] unusual performance for vac following 8.2 upgrade