Re: pg_restore multiple --function options - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: pg_restore multiple --function options
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRKJu7V9etahdiKpPe37Khv8NsmKSM9aoFVwtr237K_tA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_restore multiple --function options  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: pg_restore multiple --function options  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:17 AM, David Fetter <david@fetter.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:29:06PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> While looking at the pg_restore code, I noticed that while it
>> supports specifying multiple --table options to restore several
>> tables, it does not support multiple --function options. Or --index,
>> --schema, or --trigger.
>>
>> The support for multiple --table options was added in 9.3, in
>> January. See
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAK3UJRG+yV1mK5twLfKVMCwXH4f6PnJou6Rn=ecabyfQH1vVHg@mail.gmail.com.
>> Was there a particular reason for only doing it for --table, or was
>> it just an oversight or lack of interest? No doubt that --table is
>> the most interesting one, but IMHO the other options should behave
>> the same, for the sake of consistency.
>
> +1 for making them consistent.  There will also be an improvement in
> usability.
+1. It would be good to have consistency there for all the objects.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Gierth
Date:
Subject: Re: UNNEST with multiple args, and TABLE with multiple funcs
Next
From: "yinminmin"
Date:
Subject: [GENERAL] Call for translations