Re: Conflicting option checking in pg_restore
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
From: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
To: Narayanan V <vnarayanan.email@gmail.com>
Cc: daniel@yesql.se, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2018-10-28T18:42:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello Narayanan, >> There is a possible catch: >> >> Function RestoreArchive is called both from pg_dump & pg_restore, so now >> the sanity check is not performed for the former (which does not have the >> -1 option, though). Moreover, the function is noted "Public", which may >> suggest that external tools could take advantage of it, and if so it >> suggests that maybe it is not wise to remove the test. Any opinion around? > > [...] > > Wouldn't ropt->single_txn be undefined when called from pg_dump ? Yes, probably. > Unless I missed something here, I think it is logical to just move the > relevant code to pg_restore main. My point is that given the "Public" comment and that some care is taken to put everything in a special struct, I was wondering whether external tools may use this function, in which case the check would be left out. -- Fabien.
Commits
-
Consolidate cross-option checks in pg_restore
- c34bca9ea55e 12.0 landed
-
Throw an error when using -C and -1 at the same time in pg_restore.
- 3a819b078036 8.4.0 cited