On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 07:55:33PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Seems like this might be a good idea to avoid the type of failure
> exhibited in bug #8128. We don't care too much about the readability
> of the dump script created during an upgrade, so it's hard to see a
> downside.
Fine with me.
--
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, readability of those commands is worth something too, but in any
> case the short answer is that pg_dump has only one quote-an-identifier
> function, not different ones for server commands and final output.
Well for the final output one reas
Greg Stark writes:
> Huh. I thought you were talking about quoting identifiers in an SQL
> dump. But you're not, you're talking about quoting identifiers in sql
> being sent to the server during the pg_dump process. Why did pg_dump
> ever not quote all such identifiers?
Well, readability of those
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Seems like this might be a good idea to avoid the type of failure
> exhibited in bug #8128. We don't care too much about the readability
> of the dump script created during an upgrade, so it's hard to see a
> downside.
Huh. I thought you were ta
Seems like this might be a good idea to avoid the type of failure
exhibited in bug #8128. We don't care too much about the readability
of the dump script created during an upgrade, so it's hard to see a
downside.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
