On 11 October 2012 20:30, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> I have a quietish few days starting on Saturday, will be looking at this
>> then. Is it only the Windows aspect that needs reviewing? Are we more or
>> less happy with the rest?
>
> I think the Windows issues were the biggest thing, but I suspect there
> may be a few other warts as well. It's a lot of code, and it's
> modifying pg_dump, which is an absolute guarantee that it's built on a
> foundation made out of pure horse manure.
That may be so, but enough people dependent upon it that now I'm
wondering whether we should be looking to create a new utility
altogether, or at least have pg_dump_parallel and pg_dump to avoid any
screw ups with people's backups/restores.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
