Tom Lane wrote:
Davy Durham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So, if this patch is not acceptable as-is, what would you feel about
I could enhance the -t/--table=NAME option to accept more than a
simple NAME. Rather it could accept something in the form:
Well, that would at least address the complaint that it doesn't scale
to multiple tables, but the whole thing still seems like a frammish
that will never see enough use to justify maintaining it.
(BTW, what will you do with a table whose name contains a colon?)
ISTM this would be better off waiting until we turn large parts of
pg_dump into a library, as has been often discussed, at which point it
should be relatively simple to write a custom client to do what the OP
wants. I agree that it does not at all belong in pg_dump.
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: