On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:45 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> If we did it like that, the rationale for an actual --set-db-properties >>> switch would vanish, at least so far as pg_dumpall is concerned -- we >>> could just make all that behavior an integral part of --create. And >>> this wouldn't need to be conditional on getting ALTER DATABASE >>> CURRENT_DATABASE done. > >> Unfortunately, I have a feeling that --set-db-properties might not be >> the only thing that would vanish. I think users are accustomed by now >> to the idea that if you restore into an existing database, the >> existing contents are preserved and the new stuff from the dump is >> added (possibly with some errors and messiness). With this design, >> the existing database contents will instead vanish, and that is >> probably going to make somebody unhappy. > > Well, we could say that the properties of template1 and postgres > are only restored if you use --clean.
True. Would that be a POLA violation, do you think? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
