Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?
Date
Msg-id 2745562.1726942969@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?  (Florents Tselai <florents.tselai@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?
List pgsql-hackers
Florents Tselai <florents.tselai@gmail.com> writes:
> Ah,  swapped them by mistake on the previous email:
> They're both available in the pg_dump and note on -n missing in pg_restore.
> The question remains though:
> Shouldn’t there be a note about -n in pg_restore ?

Probably.  I see that pg_dump has a third copy of the exact same
note for "-e".  pg_restore lacks that switch for some reason,
but this is surely looking mighty duplicative.  I propose getting
rid of the per-switch Notes and putting a para into the Notes
section, along the lines of

    When -e, -n, or -t is specified, pg_dump makes no attempt to dump
    any other database objects that the selected object(s) might
    depend upon. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the results of
    a selective dump can be successfully restored by themselves into a
    clean database.

and mutatis mutandis for pg_restore.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Florents Tselai
Date:
Subject: Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ?
Next
From: Nitin Jadhav
Date:
Subject: Re: Extensible storage manager API - SMGR hook Redux