Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > This argument seems a bit irrelevant to me. pg_dump doesn't get to pick > and choose what will be in the database it's told to dump. If we're
Sure. > going to do something like what Joel wants, we have to have file naming > conventions for operator and cast objects. So we can't just leave them > out of the conversation (or if we do, we shouldn't be surprised when the > ensuing design sucks). I guess what we're saying is that at this point we can pick non user friendly naming rules, like pg_operator/<oid>.sql or something like that, OID based. Impacted users might as well learn about extensions. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
