RE: proposal: pg_restore --convert-to-text

Imai, Yoshikazu <imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com>

From: "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai.yoshikazu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: 'Euler Taveira' <euler@timbira.com.br>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se>, "Andrew Gierth" <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-03-18T00:21:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 10:55 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
> > Is there no need to rewrite the Description in the Doc to state we should
> specify either -d or -f option?
> > (and also it might be better to write if -l option is given, neither
> > -d nor -f option isn't necessarily needed.)
> >
> I don't think so. The description is already there (see "pg_restore can
> operate in two modes..."). I left -l as is which means that 'pg_restore
> -l foo.dump' dumps to standard output and 'pg_restore -f - -l foo.dump'
> has the same behavior).

Ah, I understand it.

> > I think the former one looks like pretty, but which one is preffered?
> >
> I don't have a style preference but decided to change to your suggestion.
> New version attached.

I checked it. It may be a trivial matter, so thanks for taking it consideration.

--
Yoshikazu Imai

Commits

  1. pg_restore: Require "-f -" to mean stdout