Does anyone have a philosophical objection to a symlink from pg_dump to
(new) pg_backup?
The reason I ask is that with the new BLOB support, to do a proper backup
of the database one has to type:
pg_dump --blob -Fc ...etc
where --blob tells it to dump BLOBs and -Fc tells it to use the custon file
format, which at the moment is the only one that supports BLOB storage.
The idea would be for pg_dump to look at it's name, and make --blob and -Fc
defaults if it is called as pg_backup. These can of course be overridden
when binary blob load direct into psql is supported (maybe 'LO_COPY from
stdin Length {len}'?)
I know someone (Tom?) objected to symlinked files drastically changing
command behaviour, but this is not a drastic change, so I live in hope.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \| | --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/
