Re: v12 and pg_restore -f- - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Gierth
Subject Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Date
Msg-id 875zl11tla.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

 Tom> Perhaps we could change the back branches so that they interpret
 Tom> "-f -" as "write to stdout", but without enforcing that you use
 Tom> that syntax.

We should definitely do that.

 Tom> Alternatively, we could revert the v12 behavior change. On the
 Tom> whole that might be the wiser course. I do not think the costs and
 Tom> benefits of this change were all that carefully thought through.

Failing to specify -d is a _really fricking common_ mistake for
inexperienced users, who may not realize that the fact that they're
seeing a ton of SQL on their terminal is not the normal result.
Seriously, this comes up on a regular basis on IRC (which is why I
suggested initially that we should do something about it).

-- 
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: v12 and pg_restore -f-