On 31.05.24 10:24, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-05-30 at 08:21 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> No objections to using export over backup, but it does make the use of
>> "restore" feel awkward as that's generally an operation on a backup and not an
>> export.
>>
>> - least one schema/table in the backup file.
>> + least one schema/table in the file to be restored.
>>
>> Would it make sense to use "import" in some cases instead?
>
> What about calling it "dump file" instead of "file to be restored"?
I forgot about this one for a bit. I committed it now as I had proposed
it. The pg_restore man page consistently talks about "restoring" a
file, so this change makes that more consistent. Introducing another
verb would require more changes to properly introduce and explain it,
which seems out of scope for this particular patch.
