Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Christopher Kings-Lynne
Subject Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T option
Date
Msg-id 40FDC666.8050700@familyhealth.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T  ("David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com>)
Responses Re: Patch for pg_dump: Multiple -t options and new -T  (Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au>)
List pgsql-patches
> No, it doesn't.  I can look into that if you like.  The patch was
> entirely to satisfy a need some of our customers have.  The -T switch
> does fill a real need for our customers; our product has a couple of tables
> that aren't critical if they aren't backed up, but as the product evolves,
> we occasionally add more tables.  So it's easier to use a -T switch to
> say what *not* to back up, than multiple -t switches to say what to back up.

Well, since you wrote the patch, you'd be better off munging it.  Read
Tom's comments and see what you can come up with.  There's been no
decision made yet though on what changes to make however.

Chris


pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Next
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump --clean w/ <= 7.2 server