Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
<ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote:
I for myself would be rather annoyed if we started quoting all column names
in our dumps. This is seriously hampering readability and while it is
already annoying that pg_dump output is slightly different from the original
DDL used this would make it far worse.
It's only been proposed to make it an option, not to shove it down
anyone's throat.
that will pretty much defeat the purpose for most use cases i guess
because people will dump with the defaults and only discover the problem
after the fact.
Given Tom's comments upthread, I suspect that much of this will come
down to whether anyone feels like trying to put in the work to make
this happen, and whether they can come up with a reasonably clean
design that doesn't involve massive code changes. Having not studied
the problem, I don't have an opinion on whether that's possible.
Well it is probably not possible in the general sense anyway especially
not if one considers dynamic SQL and stuff in plpgsql and friends - it
still feels like a lot of wasted effort(or rather a promise we are
tzrying to make but wont be able to hold) for only limited gain to me.
I do agree that the human readability of pg_dump is an asset in many
situations - I have often dumped out the DDL for particular objects
just to look at it, for example. However, I emphatically do NOT agree
that leaving someone with a 500MB dump file (or, for some people on
this list, a whole heck of a lot larger than that) that has to be
manually edited to reload is a useful behavior. It's a huge pain in
the neck.
well that's why we recommend to use the new version of pg_dump to dump
the old cluster if the intention is an upgrade not sure that is any more
pain than manually hacking the dump...
Stefan
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
