On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Uh ... what in that is creating the already-extant parent?
/me looks embarrassed.
Never mind. I didn't read what you wrote carefully enough.
>> I think one answer to the original complaint might be to add a new
>> flag to pg_dump, something like --recursive-selection, maybe -r for
>> short, which makes --table, --exclude-table, and --exclude-table-data
>> cascade to inheritance descendents.
>
> Yeah, you could do it like that. Another way to do it would be to
> create variants of all the selection switches, along the lines of
> "--table-all=foo" meaning "foo plus its children". Then you could
> have some switches recursing and others not within the same command.
> But maybe that's more flexibility than needed ... and I'm having a
> hard time coming up with nice switch names, anyway.
I don't think that's as good. It's a lot more typing than what I
proposed and I don't think anyone is really going to want the
flexibility.
> Anyway, I'm still of the opinion that it's fine to leave this as a
> future feature. If we've gotten away without it this long for
> inherited tables, it's unlikely to be critical for partitioned tables.
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
