Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joachim Wieland
Subject Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only
Date
Msg-id CACw0+135XXat9omX7JfzeJCT+ruhD-dU-gSMu+D3GRdf=4jD9A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only  ("Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> Updated version with pg_restore included is attached.

The patch applies with some fuzz by now but compiles without errors or warnings.

The feature just works, it is not adding a lot of new code, basically
it parses the given options and then skips over steps depending on the
selected section.

I verified the equivalence of -a and -s to the respective sections in
the different archive formats and no surprise here either, they were
equivalent except for the header (which has a timestamp).

If you ask pg_restore to restore a section out of an archive which
doesn't have this section, there is no error and the command just
succeeds. This is what I expected and I think it's the right thing to
do but maybe others think that
there should be a warning.

In pg_restore, pre-data cannot be run in parallel, it would only run
serially, data and post-data can run in parallel, though. This is also
what I had expected but it might be worth to add a note about this to
the documentation.

What I didn't like about the implementation was the two set_section()
functions, I'd prefer them to move to a file that is shared between
pg_dump and pg_restore and become one function...


Minor issues:

{"section", required_argument, NULL, 5} in pg_dump.c is not in the alphabetical
order of the options.
./pg_restore --section=foobar
pg_restore: unknown section name "foobar")

Note the trailing ')', it's coming from a _(...) confusion

Some of the lines in the patch have trailing spaces and in the
documentation part tabs and spaces are mixed.

int skip used as bool skip in dumpDumpableObject()


Joachim


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: NISHIYAMA Tomoaki
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PostgreSQL fails to build with 32bit MinGW-w64
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only