Neil Conway wrote: > On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 23:42 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I don't remember this patch. > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-07/msg00331.php > > > How is it related to the other pg_dump > > patches in the 8.1 pathces queue? > > I missed the July '04 discussion about the other patches for improving > -t behavior. AFAIK the patches are unrelated. > > Something like the design elaborated here: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-07/msg00374.php > > looks good to me, and would be preferrable to Andreas' patch IMHO. > Unless I'm missing something, I don't see a patch from David Skoll in > that thread that actually implements the above behavior. I'd be happy to > implement Tom's suggested design for 8.1 unless someone has already > beaten me to it.
There were actually competing pg_dump -n patches in July. I think I just kept the last one posted. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
