On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:02:55PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > "shakahsha...@gmail.com" <shakahsha...@gmail.com> writes: > > > From pg_dump/pg_restore section (9.2 of the Todo page on the > > > PostgreSQL Wiki), is the following item "Add comments to output > > > indicating version of pg_dump and of the database server" simply > > > asking for a change to the pg_dump header from: > > > > I think so, but what's not clear is whether this is a good idea to > > do in the default output. It might only be appropriate in > > "verbose" mode, so as not to introduce unnecessary diffs between > > logically identical dumps. > > Well, a diff of the same database made by different (major) versions > of pg_dump will already be different in most situations, so adding > the pg_dump version number in it is essentially free from this > perspective. > > What is the use case for adding the server version?
There have been cases where pg_restore doesn't fix infelicities. For example, there was a time when it was a good idea to run adddepend after the reload. Knowing what server version the dump came from could be handy for this kind of case. > I can imagine something like wanting to know exactly where the dump > came from, but then host name and such would be better. (And then > you can infer the server version from that.) You can infer the server version until the next upgrade, at which point the information is lost. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
