> It is irony, so this is death code - it is not used now. So I removed it > from patch. > > Reduced, fixed patch attached + used tests
Nice, thanks.
Here's a new version in which I reworded some comments and docs, and also inverted the sense of some if/else so that the oneliner case is first, which makes it more readable IMHO.
ok
thank you
However, I don't think this is behaving sanely in pg_dumpall. AFAICT, pg_dumpall does not pass --clean to pg_dump (in other words it only emits DROP for the global objects, not the objects contained inside databases), so passing --if-exists results in failures. Therefore I think the solution is to not pass --if-exists to pg_dump at all, i.e. keep it internal to pg_dumpall. But maybe I'm missing something.
I'll look on it tomorrow
I still find the code to inject IF EXISTS to the DROP commands ugly as sin. I would propose to stop storing the dropStmt in the archive anymore; instead just store the object identity, which can later be used to generate both DROP commands, with or without IF EXISTS, and the ALTER OWNER commands. However, that's a larger project and I don't think we need to burden this patch with that.
there are more similar parts - and I am not sure if it is little bit heroic task.
Another point is that we could argue about whether specifying --if-exists ought to imply --clean instead of erroring out. There's no backwards compatibility argument to be had; it's not like existing scripts are going to suddenly start dropping objects that weren't dropped before.
It is valid idea. I looked on any other options for and I don't known any similar implication - so I prefer current implementation (no implication). It is consistent with any other. I have not strong opinion about it - a user comfort is against a clarity - but two "clean" option can be confusing maybe.
Regards
Pavel
Other than the pg_dumpall issue, this patch seems ready.
