On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Joel Jacobson <j...@trustly.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Daniel Farina <dan...@heroku.com> wrote: >> Also, now that I look more carefully, there was a lot of conversation >> about this patch; it seems like what you are doing now is reporting >> its successful use, and I did not understand that by reading the >> abstract of your email. And, beyond that, do we have a summary of the >> open questions that prevented it from being committed? > > Good idea. Here is an attempt to a summary:
Thank you, that's very informative. I'd like to reiterate one question, though, which is something like: "How do you feel that the since-committed directory-output/input support in pg_dump/pg_restore could or should influence your patch, if at all?" It seems like now that there is support for spitting out a bunch of files in a directory for pg_dump that is now going to be supported for a long time that a new feature like yours might be more cohesive if it somehow played with that. I must confess I haven't read the patch in detail, especially if it has been updated, but back then there was no multi-file output mode from pg_dump, and now there is one. My naive understanding is this would be adding a second one as-is, but I wonder if that is strictly necessary to fulfill the use case. -- fdr -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
