Feedback-ID: ie3de48e3:Fastmail
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 22:04:14 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro?= Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_dump --with-* options
Message-ID: <202507302004.bjwvd3jk6rh6@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <cf21ea99caa39e89d26b8d83d78610db8938bdba.camel@j-davis.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/202507302004.bjwvd3jk6rh6%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2025-Jul-30, Jeff Davis wrote:

> On Wed, 2025-07-30 at 10:23 +0200, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Maybe we should invent a new
> > switch, something like
> >   --include=[schema,data,statistics]
> > with which users can give one or more comma-separated types to be
> > included in the dump.  
> 
> Robert Treat brought up a similar idea before:
> 
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABV9wwO5v8Nu8q%2BxWexMdL3Z%2B2xS%3DfFJMQetBSHy3tR64wNHOA%40mail.gmail.com

Oh, I hadn't seen it, but now that I do, it seems identical to mine.  He
even used some of the same terms I did.

> > Then we state that --data-only is synonym for --include=data and
> > --schema-only is synonym for --include=schema, and we don't need any
> > other switches.  Then it is obvious what happens, how to combine
> > object types in the dumps and restores, and there's no need to reject
> > invalid combinations because there aren't any.
> 
> I assume that should be read as something like "include only", because
> --include=data would also be excluding the schema and the stats.

Of course.

> And if that's the case, it does seem strange to do something like "--
> include=data --schema-only".

> Another question: could you have multiple --include options, like "--
> include=data --include=schema"? Because you currently can't do "--data-
> only --schema-only". So that would make it not quite an alias.

IMO we should only allow one --include.

> If we go in this direction, it might be easier to just say that --
> include conflicts with --schema-only and --data-only.

Yep.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera         PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Small aircraft do not crash frequently ... usually only once!"
                                  (ponder, http://thedailywtf.com/)