Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?
Date
Msg-id 3452905.1648233431@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
List pgsql-hackers
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 10:57 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> pg_dump never dumps system objects, so I don't see a need for
>> a switch to tell it not to.

> I considered pg_class to be a system object, which was dumped under -t '*'

Oh!  You're right, the --table switches will include system objects.
That seems like a bug TBH.  Even if it's intentional, it's surely
not behavior we want for functions.  You can somewhat easily
exclude system catalogs from matching --table since they all have
names starting with "pg_", but it'd be way more painful for functions
because (a) there are thousands and (b) they're not very predictably
named.

I'd vote for changing the behavior of --table rather than trying to
be bug-compatible with this decision.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Add non-blocking version of PQcancel
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ?