Re: pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Euler Taveira
Subject Re: pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output
Date
Msg-id 5314A28C.6080307@timbira.com.br
Whole thread Raw
In response to pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output  ("Wang, Jing" <jingw@fast.au.fujitsu.com>)
Responses Re: pg_dump reporing version of server & pg_dump as comments in the output  ("Wang, Jing" <jingw@fast.au.fujitsu.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 27-02-2014 21:10, Wang, Jing wrote:
> Using pg_dump can dump the data into the file with format set to be
> 'c','t' or plain text. In the existing version the version of server &
> pg_dump is already there when the format of file is 'c' or 't'. And even
> for the plain text format file the version of server & pg_dump is
> already there if using '--verbose' in pg_dump. Using '--verbose' leads
> to some many other prints which are not required always. 
> 
I don't buy your argument. Why isn't verbose option sufficient? Did you
read the old thread about this [1]?

AFAICS a lot of people compare pg_dump diffs. If we apply this patch, it
would break those applications. Also, it is *already* available if you
add verbose option (which is sufficient to satisfy those that want the
client and/or server version) in plain mode (the other modes already
include the desired info by default). In the past, timestamps were
removed to avoid noise in diffs.


[1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3677.1253912361@sss.pgh.pa.us


--   Euler Taveira                   Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/  PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento,
Suporte24x7 e Treinamento
 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Custom Scan APIs (Re: Custom Plan node)