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