On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 11:45:11PM +0200, Álvaro Herrera wrote: > I think the concept here is that all short options go first in > alphabetical order, then the long options in their own alphabetical > order, and if one option has both, then the short option takes > precedence.
That's what it looks like to me, too. > If that's the idea, then --filter in pg_dumpall is in the > wrong place, and other than that it looks good. I missed that one, thanks. > I think that's what gives the shorter patch. But where would you look > for, say, --large-objects? I mean, how do you know that its short > version is -b? Maybe it would make more sense to sort on long options > first and put short options as the second-priority item for each option. Fair point. We seem to be pivoting towards long options, anyway. If there's support for this, I could go through all the client and server application docs to ensure they match this style. -- nathan
