Re: pg_dump exclusion switches and functions/types

David Fetter <david@fetter.org>

From: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
To: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2006-10-08T01:22:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:28:21PM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> 
> > The existing patch's behavior is that "the rightmost switch wins",
> > ie, if an object's name matches more than one pattern then it is
> > included or excluded according to the rightmost switch it matches.
> > This is, erm, poorly documented, but it seems like useful behavior
> > so I don't have an objection myself.
> 
> I don't know, it sounds like it's the source of the confusion you
> identify later.
> 
> My first thought is that the rule should be to apply all the
> inclusion switches (implicitly including everything if there are
> none), then apply all the exclusion switches.

+1 :)

Order-dependent switches are a giant foot gun.

Cheers,
D
-- 
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778        AIM: dfetter666
                              Skype: davidfetter

Remember to vote!