Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, "Jim Nasby" <jim@nasby.net>, "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com>
Date: 2011-11-15T23:14:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Sat, November 12, 2011 8:56 pm, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/2011 05:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro Herrera<alvherre@commandprompt.com>  writes:
>>> The "--section=data --section=indexes" proposal seems very reasonable
>>> to
>>> me -- more so than "--sections='data indexes'".
>> +1 ... not only easier to code and less squishily defined, but more like
>> the existing precedent for other pg_dump switches, such as --table.
>>
>>
>
>
> Here is a patch for that for pg_dump. The sections provided for are
> pre-data, data and post-data, as discussed elsewhere. I still feel that
> anything finer grained should be handled via pg_restore's --use-list
> functionality. I'll provide a patch to do the same switch for pg_restore
> shortly.
>
> Adding to the commitfest.
>


Updated version with pg_restore included is attached.

cheers

andrew