Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: > It seems that if I exclude a table using -T, its dependant sequences do > not get excluded. But if I include it using -t, its dependent sequences > *do* get included.
> Is there a reason this is a good idea, or is it just an oversight? It's not immediately clear to me that those switches ought to be exact inverses. As a counterexample, consider the case where multiple tables share the same sequence. Suppressing one of the tables with -T ought not lead to suppressing the sequence. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers