Tom Lane writes:
> You seem to have missed the point completely - Neil wanted to suppress
> the normal progress messages *on stderr* so that he'd only get an email
> report when there was an abnormal event. That request seemed fine to
> me, though I thought the patch itself might have some porta
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Without showing the database being dumped, the entire output of
> pg_dumpall seems pretty useless so you may as well pipe the whole output
> to /dev/null. I don't think a quiet feature for pg_dumpall has enough
> use for ordinary users. Sorry.
You seem
