Re: [doc] clarify behaviour of pg_dump's -t/--table option with non-tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: [doc] clarify behaviour of pg_dump's -t/--table option with non-tables
Date
Msg-id CABUevEziaz9yZaCgMmLHpzVb1+vGC7zjkFdJnYwYEZH6UkFGZQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [doc] clarify behaviour of pg_dump's -t/--table option with non-tables  (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [doc] clarify behaviour of pg_dump's -t/--table option with non-tables  (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 3:45 PM Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com> wrote:
2020年10月6日(火) 21:58 Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>:
>
> Hi
>
> Recently I ran into a case where someone was wondering why it was not
> possible to dump the contents of a view, even though the documentation [1]
> seems to imply this is possible.
>
> Currently it says:
>
>   Dump only tables with names matching pattern. For this purpose, "table"
>   includes views, materialized views, sequences, and foreign tables.
>
> The attached patch attempts to clarify that only definitions of those objects
> will be dumped, and also mentions that dumping foreign table data requires the
> --include-foreign-data option.
>
> I suggest backpatching any changes to Pg13 where the --include-foreign-data
> option was added.
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-pgdump.html

Better version attached.

Argh, perfect timing. I'll update with your new version :)
 
--

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: [doc] clarify behaviour of pg_dump's -t/--table option with non-tables
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2