Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I was thinking a NOTICE at most. If it's a WARNING then restoring >> perfectly valid pg_dump files will result in lots of scary-looking >> chatter. You could make an argument for printing nothing at all, >> but that would probably mislead people who'd fat-fingered their >> COMMUTATOR entries.
> What about jiggering the dump so that only the second of the two > operators to be dumped includes the COMMUTATOR clause? Seems messy and fragile. In particular this'd represent a lot of work in order to make it more likely that the restore malfunctions if someone makes use of pg_restore's -l switch to reorder the entries. Also it would not retroactively fix the problem for restoring dumps made with existing pg_dump versions. > Even a NOTICE in > pg_dump seems like too much chatter (witness recent quieting of some > other NOTICE messages we've all grown tired of) pg_dump has included "set client_min_messages = warning" in its output for quite some time now. So as long as we don't insist on making this a WARNING, people won't see it in that usage. 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