Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-08-26 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: [blah] fixed Moved to next CF 2015-09. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-08-23 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi 2015-08-22 0:09 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby jim.na...@bluetreble.com: The following review has been posted through the commitfest application: make installcheck-world: tested, passed Implements feature: tested, failed Spec compliant: not tested Documentation:not

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-08-13 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi 2015-07-30 12:44 GMT+02:00 Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi: On 07/25/2015 07:08 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: I am sending a new patch - without checking wildcard chars. The documentation says the option is called --strict-names, while the code has --strict-mode. I like --strict-names

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-08-13 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi I am sending updated version news: * strict-names everywhere * checking table names in pg_dump simplified - not necessary to create single query * pg_restore support Regards Pavel 2015-08-13 9:17 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: Hi 2015-07-30 12:44 GMT+02:00 Heikki

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-30 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 07/25/2015 07:08 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: I am sending a new patch - without checking wildcard chars. The documentation says the option is called --strict-names, while the code has --strict-mode. I like --strict-names more, mode seems redundant, and it's not clear what it's strict about.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-25 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi I am sending a new patch - without checking wildcard chars. Regards Pavel 2015-07-23 7:22 GMT+02:00 Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp : Hello, 2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: I am sending updated version. It implements new long

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-22 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Hello, 2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: I am sending updated version. It implements new long option --strict-names. If this option is used, then for any entered name (without any wildcard char) must be found least one object. This option has not impact

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-22 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Sorry for the bogus on bogus. At Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:22:59 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time), Kyotaro HORIGUCHI horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp wrote in 20150723.142259.200902861.horiguchi.kyot...@lab.ntt.co.jp Hello, 2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: I am

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: Hi I am sending updated version. It implements new long option --strict-names. If this option is used, then for any entered name (without any wildcard char) must be found least one object. This option has not impact on

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-07-19 21:08 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: 2015-07-19 20:54 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: Hi I am sending updated version. It implements new long option --strict-names. If this option is used, then for any entered name (without any wildcard char)

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi I am sending updated version. It implements new long option --strict-names. If this option is used, then for any entered name (without any wildcard char) must be found least one object. This option has not impact on patters (has wildcards chars). When this option is not used, then behave is

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-07-07 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 1:41 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-05-22 18:34 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Oleksandr Shulgin oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de writes: I think this is a bit over-engineered (apart from the fact that processSQLNamePattern is also used

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Shulgin, Oleksandr
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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-05-22 18:35 GMT+02:00 Shulgin, Oleksandr oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de : On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Pavel Stehule
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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Shulgin, Oleksandr
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Oleksandr Shulgin oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de writes: 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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Tom Lane
Oleksandr Shulgin oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de writes: 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). Also, the new --table-if-exists

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-05-22 18:34 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Oleksandr Shulgin oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de writes: 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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-05-21 16:48 GMT+02:00 Oleksandr Shulgin oleksandr.shul...@zalando.de: Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes: 2015-03-23 17:11 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: Hi 2015-03-15 16:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Pavel Stehule

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-05-22 Thread Shulgin, Oleksandr
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: 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

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-24 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-03-23 17:11 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: Hi 2015-03-15 16:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes: other variant, I hope better than previous. We can introduce new long option --strict. With this active option, every

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-23 Thread Pavel Stehule
Hi 2015-03-15 16:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes: other variant, I hope better than previous. We can introduce new long option --strict. With this active option, every pattern specified by -t option have to have identifies exactly

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-19 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-03-15 16:09 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes: other variant, I hope better than previous. We can introduce new long option --strict. With this active option, every pattern specified by -t option have to have identifies exactly only

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-15 Thread Tom Lane
Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com writes: other variant, I hope better than previous. We can introduce new long option --strict. With this active option, every pattern specified by -t option have to have identifies exactly only one table. It can be used for any other should to exists

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-14 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-03-14 19:33 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com: 2015-03-13 23:43 GMT+01:00 Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com: On 03/13/2015 10:01 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2015-03-13 17:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 13,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-14 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-03-13 23:43 GMT+01:00 Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com: On 03/13/2015 10:01 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2015-03-13 17:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-13 Thread David G. Johnston
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-13 17:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: we found possible bug in pg_dump. It raise a error only when all

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-13 Thread Josh Berkus
On 03/13/2015 10:01 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: 2015-03-13 17:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com mailto:pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: we found possible bug in

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-13 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: we found possible bug in pg_dump. It raise a error only when all specified tables doesn't exists. When it find any table, then ignore missing other. /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_dump -t Foo -t omega -s postgres

Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump quietly ignore missing tables - is it bug?

2015-03-13 Thread Pavel Stehule
2015-03-13 17:39 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule pavel.steh...@gmail.com wrote: we found possible bug in pg_dump. It raise a error only when all specified tables doesn't exists. When it find any table, then ignore missing other.