"David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com> writes:
> How about this:
> pg_dump -t t1 -- Dump table t1 in any schema
> pg_dump -n s1 -- Dump all of schema s1
> pg_dump -t t1 -n s1 -- Dump t1 in s1
> pg_dump -t t1 -t t2 -n s1 -- Dump s1.t1 and s1.t2
> pg_dump -t t1 -t t2 -n s1 -n s2 -- Dump s1.t1, s1.t2, s2.t1 and s2.t2
Why not
pg_dump -t t1 -- Dump table t1 in any schema
pg_dump -n s1 -- Dump all of schema s1
pg_dump -t s1.t1 -- Dump t1 in s1
pg_dump -t s1.t1 -t s2.t2 -- Dump s1.t1 and s2.t2
pg_dump -t t1 -t t2 -n s1 -n s2 -- Dump s1.t1, s1.t2, s2.t1 and s2.t2
That is, the rules are:
- if any -t switches appear, only tables matching (any one of)
those switches are dumped
- if any -n switches appear, only objects in (any one of)
those schemas are dumped
- a -t switch can be name only or schema.name
The cross-product semantics you're proposing can't implement my fourth
example.
I really dislike the idea of switch ordering making a difference...
> We also probably should not warn about missing tables, because it's
> likely that the full cartesian product of schemas and tables won't
> exist.
Agreed. If any -t or -n switches appear, then warn only if *no* objects
get selected.
regards, tom lane
