Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> > If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
> > -X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
> > --disable-triggers ?
>
> This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
-X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
--disable-triggers ?
This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
pha
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the
> -X at all? Why would one want to use -X disable-triggers instead of
> --disable-triggers ?
This was added before we had portable long options. I suppose we could
phase it out.
--
Peter Eisentraut
Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> What use is the -X flag to pg_dump. The code say that if one add a setting
> "feature" to -X then there should also be a flag "--feature". So we have
> for example:
>
> -X disable-triggers
>
> and
>
> --disable-triggers
>
> If all the -X flags come in a long for
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> What use is the -X flag to pg_dump?
Let me just state before someone else does, that I don't want to remove
-X. The question is if one should add new flags to it or simply just use
the long form for new ones.
--
/Dennis Björklund
What use is the -X flag to pg_dump. The code say that if one add a setting
"feature" to -X then there should also be a flag "--feature". So we have
for example:
-X disable-triggers
and
--disable-triggers
If all the -X flags come in a long form as well, then what use is the -X
at all? Why
