On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:07 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for comments, attached updated patch
>
Few comments:
+invalid_filter_format(char *message, char *filename, char *line, int lineno)
+{
+ char *displayname;
+
+ displayname = *filename == '-' ? "stdin" : filename;
+
+ pg_log_error("invalid format of filter file \"%s\": %s",
+ displayname,
+ message);
+
+ fprintf(stderr, "%d: %s\n", lineno, line);
+ exit_nicely(1);
+}
I think fclose is missing here.
done
+ if (line[chars - 1] == '\n')
+ line[chars - 1] = '\0';
Should we check for '\r' also to avoid failures in some platforms.
I checked other usage of fgets in Postgres source code, and everywhere is used test on \n
\n should be on Mac OS X .. 2001 year .. I am not sure if Mac OS 9 should be supported.
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term><option>--filter=<replaceable
class="parameter">filename</replaceable></option></term>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Read filters from file. Format "(+|-)(tnfd) objectname:
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
I felt some documentation is missing here. We could include,
options tnfd is for controlling table, schema, foreign server data &
table exclude patterns.
I have a plan to completate doc when the design is completed. It was not clear if people prefer long or short forms of option names.
Instead of using tnfd, if we could use the same options as existing
pg_dump options it will be less confusing.
it almost same
+-t .. tables
+-n schema
-d exclude data .. there is not short option for --exclude-table-data
+f include foreign table .. there is not short option for --include-foreign-data
So still, there is a opened question if use +-tnfd system, or system based on long option
table foo
exclude-table foo
schema xx
exclude-schema xx
include-foreign-data yyy
exclude-table-data zzz
Typically these files will be generated by scripts and processed via pipe, so there I see just two arguments for and aginst:
short format - there is less probability to do typo error (but there is not full consistency with pg_dump options)
long format - it is self documented (and there is full consistency with pg_dump)
In this case I prefer short form .. it is more comfortable for users, and there are only a few variants, so it is not necessary to use too verbose language (design). But my opinion is not aggressively strong and I'll accept any common agreement.
Regards
Updated patch attached
Regards,
Vignesh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
