Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1eekwa-00015o-1V
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:04:08 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1eekwZ-00071V-JJ
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:04:07 +0000
Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1eekvd-0007fT-M3
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:03:09 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1eekvW-00022l-9i
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 17:03:08 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w0PH2x52014525;
	Thu, 25 Jan 2018 12:02:59 -0500
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
cc: "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Further cleanup of pg_dump/pg_restore item selection code
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKFQuwYp-K+ZjdGnJXTW5HqOugWiWE1UyMmgoKgMy+4mEM4OLw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <32668.1516848577@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKFQuwZB=-7SL9EMjGSDAb=J13Ed8F372t6U2epYtSn=DX3DKg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4858.1516853858@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAKFQuwYp-K+ZjdGnJXTW5HqOugWiWE1UyMmgoKgMy+4mEM4OLw@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:24:02 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <14523.1516899779.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 12:02:59 -0500
Message-ID: <14524.1516899779@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-hackers.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers>
Precedence: bulk

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> Should pg_restore fail if asked to --create without a database entry in the
> TOC?

Yeah, I wondered about that too.  This patch makes it a non-issue for
archives created with v11 or later pg_dump, but there's still a hazard
if you're restoring from an archive made by an older pg_dump.  Is it
worth putting in logic to catch that?

Given the lack of field complaints, I felt fixing it going forward is
sufficient, but there's room to argue differently.

			regards, tom lane