On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 11:45:11PM +0200, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think the concept here is that all short options go first in
> alphabetical order, then the long options in their own alphabetical
> order, and if one option has both, then the short option takes
> precedence.
That's what it looks like to me, too.
> If that's the idea, then --filter in pg_dumpall is in the
> wrong place, and other than that it looks good.
I missed that one, thanks.
> I think that's what gives the shorter patch. But where would you look
> for, say, --large-objects? I mean, how do you know that its short
> version is -b? Maybe it would make more sense to sort on long options
> first and put short options as the second-priority item for each option.
Fair point. We seem to be pivoting towards long options, anyway. If
there's support for this, I could go through all the client and server
application docs to ensure they match this style.
--
nathan
