> -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 22 June 2004 22:02 > To: Dave Page > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Misc topics > > > I really want to leave this to experts, calling psql themselves. > Implementing plain restore suggests it as an equivalent > alternative, which it is not. > > Backup/Restore tools are for easy and safe support of > standard backup situations, i.e. if I hit "backup" I assume > the resulting file to include anything I might need later. > Additionally, a restore selection should be available. We > have this only with compressed and tar, not plain. As you > already mentioned, plain is for special purposes reworking > the output (do it on your own risk, if you know really what > you do) or for ancient backward compatibility.
So what you are saying is that pgAdmin will not include options to support more advanced users? > To say it with different words: > pg_dump has two modes: one creating backup files > (compressed/tar), the other extraction of data for later > manipulation. That's certainly not paired with pg_restore. > I'm beginning to think about splitting these two tasks into > two separate tools. > > I refuse to name that pg_dump plain thing a backup. It's a > data extraction, object to manipulation. You already did call it a backup when you put 'plain' and a bunch of related options on frmBackup. Currently we're in the worst case scenario - you have a bunch of backup options that'll create files that cannot be restored using the restore tool! Can we get some other opinions on this - should backup/restore include the ability to use plain text format files? > BTW, I'm waiting for PITR, which will offer the backup type that I > *really* want. Yeah, well, we're all waiting for that :-) /D ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
