On Sat, 2008-07-26 at 07:47 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > As a dev tool it makes sense.
> >
> I think we have yet another case for moving the core bits of pg_dump
> into a library that can then be used by lots of clients. Until we do
> that we're going to get continual pressure to add extra cases to pg_dump
> unrelated to its principal functionality.
That's a good idea and I support that.
I'm slightly suprised at the "principal functionality" bit. In a world
where PITR exists the role and importance of pg_dump has waned
considerably. What *is* its principal function? Does it have just one?
One man's dev system is another man's data warehouse, or another man's
backup. The meaning of a dump is defined by the user making the data
dump, not the tool used.
Is this one option sufficient to make us invent pg_make_dev_database?
(With all pg_dump options, plus -w). If that's what we need, fine by me.
I'm always interested in the capability not the structure/naming.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.comPostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
