2015-05-22 18:30 GMT+02:00 Shulgin, Oleksandr <oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de> :
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> 2015-05-21 16:48 GMT+02:00 Oleksandr Shulgin < >> oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de>: >> >>> >>> I think this is a bit over-engineered (apart from the fact that >>> processSQLNamePattern is also used in two dozen of places in >>> psql/describe.c and all of them must be touched for this patch to >>> compile). >>> >> >> it was prototype - I believe so issue with describe.c can be solved better >> >> >>> >>> Also, the new --table-if-exists options seems to be doing what the old >>> --table did, and I'm not really sure I underestand what --table does >>> now. >>> >>> I propose instead to add a separate new option --strict-include, without >>> argument, that only controls the behavior when an include pattern didn't >>> find any table (or schema). >>> >> >> hard to say - any variant has own advantages and disadvantages >> >> But I more to unlike it than like - it is more usual, when you use exact >> name so, you need it exactly one, and when you use some wildcard, so you >> are expecting one or more tables. >> >> This use case is not checked in your patch. >> > > Maybe I'm missing something, but I believe it's handled by > > pg_dump -t mytables* --strict-include > > so that it will error out if nothing was found for mytables* pattern. > If I understand it raise a error when it found more than one table Pavel > > -- > Alex > >
