Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > ... Will Red Hat be upset if we > > leave it unchanged for 7.4.X and rip this out and redo it in 7.5? > > It'd be better if we could get it right the first time, with the > understanding that the output format is not very negotiable at this > late hour. But as best I can tell, most of the unhappiness is with the > design of the switch set, which is not something I want to defend in > detail. There's a lot there that isn't needed for the RHDB tool as I > understand it, and I think that altering the switches used to get the > output that the tool does need would still be a feasible change from the > tool's point of view. > > I would be in favor of simplifying the supported switch set to the > minimum needed by Red Hat's tool (the equivalent of -G -M if I > understood Fernando correctly), and re-adding complexity in future > when and if it's shown to be needed. But we need to make a decision > about this now. Preferably yesterday.
Oh, the raw output format should follow the COPY format output, meaning literal newlines are \n and literal tabs are \<tab>, and double literal backslash. I am mentioning this now so we will not have to modify this output format in the future in case we need literal tab/newlines. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly