Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Add --no-comments to skip COMMENTs with pg_dump
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Fabrízio Mello <fabriziomello@gmail.com>, Robins Tharakan <tharakan@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Date: 2018-01-24T18:01:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> In further testing of that, I noticed that it made the behavior of our >> other bugaboo, the public schema, rather inconsistent. With this >> builtin-extensions hack, the plpgsql extension doesn't get dumped, >> whether or not you say "clean". But the public schema does get >> dropped and recreated if you say "clean". That's not helpful for >> non-superuser users of pg_dump, so I think we should try to fix it. > I'm not entirely sure about trying to also support --clean for > non-superusers.. We've long had that the public schema is dropped and > recreated with --clean and it seems likely that at least some users are > depending on us doing that. In any case, it's certainly not a change > that I think we could backpatch. Perhaps we could just change it moving > forward (which would make me happier, really, since what I think we do > with these initdb-time things currently is a bit bizarre). Sure, I was not proposing this for back-patch --- it depends on the other stuff we've committed recently, anyway. > Yes, having that in getNamespaces() isn't correct but we need to do > something there, and I've been trying to figure out what. I claim this is what ;-) regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Support --no-comments in pg_dump, pg_dumpall, pg_restore.
- 1368e92e16a0 11.0 landed
-
Improve pg_dump's handling of "special" built-in objects.
- 5955d934194c 11.0 landed