Re: pg_restore multiple --function options

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Date: 2013-08-27T20:21:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> writes:
> As the code stands, you have to pass the argument types to the 
> --function flag, ie. --function="myfunc(integer)". It's annoyingly picky 
> about the spelling, as the it has to match exactly what pg_dump prints, 
> but it does handle selecting one function from a group of overloaded 
> ones.

Oh --- OK, I was misremembering.  I recalled that people weren't happy
with the handling of --function, but had the details wrong.

[pokes around]

I think really the issues are (1) it only works in pg_restore, not
pg_dump, and (2) there's no wildcard matching (the pickiness about
argument type name spelling being perhaps a subset of that).

It's probably true that accepting multiple patterns doesn't preclude
solving either of those, and indeed might help users work around (2).
So nevermind that objection.  But I still say this is all too late
for 9.3.

			regards, tom lane