Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types
Date
Msg-id 28774.1160155345@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types  (Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com>)
Responses Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types  (Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com> writes:
> Would it be reasonable to include one more switch: 'include
> dependencies' ?

We are two months past feature freeze ... adding entirely new features
to pg_dump is *not* on the table for 8.2.  What we need to do at the
moment is make sure that the features we've got work sanely and won't
create headaches for likely future extensions; but not actually
implement those extensions.

> The scenario I most care about is to be able to make a complete data
> base dump (including non-schema objects) while excluding only a few
> tables.

Isn't this the same as Kris' complaint?  Why do you need additional
dependency analysis to do the above?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types