On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>
> On Aug 28, 2012 9:59 PM, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> >> I don't see anything particularly incorrect about that. The point of
>> >> the --verbose switch is to track what pg_dump is doing, and if what
>> >> it's doing involves going through RestoreArchive(), why should we try
>> >> to hide the fact?
>>
>> > "restoring data for table 't'" makes you think it's actuall restoring
>> > things. It's not. That dumping is implemented by calling an internal
>> > function called RestoreArchive() has to be an implementation detail...
>> > It certainly confuses users that we say "restoring" when we're not
>> > doing that...
>>
>> Well, why don't we just s/restoring/processing/ in the debug message,
>> and call it good?
>
> Sure, that would work for me... I can go do that if there are no objections.
Done.
Are we "allowed" to backpatch things to 9.2 at this point that changes
strings for translators?
-- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
