On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 19:03, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: >> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 18:59, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Just stick with the OID. There's no reason that I can see to have >>> "friendly" names for these tarfiles --- in most cases, the DBA will >>> never even deal with them, no? > >> No, this is the output mode where the DBA chooses to get the output in >> the form of tarfiles. So if chosen, he will definitely deal with it. > > Mph. How big a use-case has that got? Offhand I can't see a reason to > use it at all, ever. If you're trying to set up a clone you want the > files unpacked.
Yes, but the tool isn't just for setting up a clone. If you're doing a regular base backup, that's *not* for replication, you might want them in files. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
