Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:03:05 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Non-text mode for pg_dumpall
Message-ID: <ZmcVqPOGjoccIh-i@nathan>
References: <cb103623-8ee6-4ba5-a2c9-f32e3a4933fa@dunslane.net>
 <ZmcKMF61K4Ck51dK@nathan>
 <CABUevExoQ26jo+aQ9QZq+UMA1aD6gfpm9xBnh_t5e0DhaCeRYA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CABUevExoQ26jo+aQ9QZq+UMA1aD6gfpm9xBnh_t5e0DhaCeRYA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZmcVqPOGjoccIh-i%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 04:52:06PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 4:14 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I'm curious why we couldn't also support the "custom" format.
> 
> Or maybe even a combo - a directory of custom format files? Plus that one
> special file being globals? I'd say that's what most use cases I've seen
> would prefer.

Is there a particular advantage to that approach as opposed to just using
"directory" mode for everything?  I know pg_upgrade uses "custom" mode for
each of the databases, so a combo approach would be a closer match to the
existing behavior, but that doesn't strike me as an especially strong
reason to keep doing it that way.

-- 
nathan