On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 03:23:07PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Looking at this thread I think it makes sense to go ahead with this patch. The
> filter functionality worked on in another thread is dealing with cherry-picking
> certain objects where this is an all-or-nothing switch, so I don't think they
> are at odds with each other.
Including both procedures and functions sounds natural from here. Now
I have a different question, something that has not been discussed in
this thread at all. What about patterns? Switches like --table or
--extension are able to digest a psql-like pattern to decide which
objects to dump. Is there a reason not to have this capability for
this new switch with procedure names? I mean to handle the case
without the function arguments, even if the same name is used by
multiple functions with different arguments.
--
Michael
