Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-10-02 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:16 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Gerdan Rezende dos Santos > wrote: >> After review, I realized that there is a call to the function: >> doShellQuoting (pgdumpopts, OPTARG), which no longer seems to

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-09-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Gerdan Rezende dos Santos wrote: > After review, I realized that there is a call to the function: > doShellQuoting (pgdumpopts, OPTARG), which no longer seems to exist ... > After understand the code, I saw that the call is appendShellString >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-09-06 Thread Gerdan Rezende dos Santos
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 8/18/16 5:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I agree, but I think mandating a database name (which I suppose could be >>> > *) with the specifiers would solve that issue. >>> >> Hmm, something like "-T dbname1:pattern1 -T

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-08-19 Thread Jim Nasby
On 8/18/16 5:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I agree, but I think mandating a database name (which I suppose could be > *) with the specifiers would solve that issue. Hmm, something like "-T dbname1:pattern1 -T dbname2:pattern2" ? Bingo. Hopefully there'd be some way to consolidate the code between

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-08-18 Thread Tom Lane
Jim Nasby writes: > On 8/18/16 2:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> This seems pretty dubious to me, in particular that the identical -T >> option will be passed willy-nilly into the pg_dump runs for every >> database. That seems more likely to be a foot-gun than something

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-08-18 Thread Jim Nasby
On 8/18/16 2:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: This seems pretty dubious to me, in particular that the identical -T option will be passed willy-nilly into the pg_dump runs for every database. That seems more likely to be a foot-gun than something useful. I agree, but I think mandating a database name

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-08-18 Thread Tom Lane
Juergen Hannappel writes: > A new option -T --exlude-table for pg_dumpall. This option is then > passed through to the pg_dump which really does the work. > This feature can be used to exclude large tables that are known not > to change from a database backup dump so

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] add option to pg_dumpall to exclude tables from the dump

2016-07-07 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Juergen Hannappel wrote: > A new option -T --exlude-table for pg_dumpall. This option is then > passed through to the pg_dump which really does the work. > This feature can be used to exclude large tables that are known not > to