On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 15:35, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner >> <ste...@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote: >>> >>> I for myself would be rather annoyed if we started quoting all column >>> names >>> in our dumps. This is seriously hampering readability and while it is >>> already annoying that pg_dump output is slightly different from the >>> original >>> DDL used this would make it far worse. >> >> It's only been proposed to make it an option, not to shove it down >> anyone's throat. > > that will pretty much defeat the purpose for most use cases i guess because > people will dump with the defaults and only discover the problem after the > fact.
Well, if you dump in custom format, it could be useful to be able to do this on pg_restore time. Not having followed this thread in detail, but would that work? That would be a much more useful option... >> I do agree that the human readability of pg_dump is an asset in many >> situations - I have often dumped out the DDL for particular objects >> just to look at it, for example. However, I emphatically do NOT agree >> that leaving someone with a 500MB dump file (or, for some people on >> this list, a whole heck of a lot larger than that) that has to be >> manually edited to reload is a useful behavior. It's a huge pain in >> the neck. > > well that's why we recommend to use the new version of pg_dump to dump the > old cluster if the intention is an upgrade not sure that is any more pain > than manually hacking the dump... yeah. There are (supposedly?) a lot of *other* cases where using an old version of pg_dump won't work. At least we reserve the right for it to be. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
