Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 14:34:34 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Mahendra Singh Thalor <mahi6run@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_restore --format= option(without any value) should report an
 error as pg_dump is reporting an error
Message-ID: <abhbSpewJZz0H999@nathan>
References: 
 <CAKYtNApkh=Vy2DpNRCnEJmPpxNuksbAh_QBav=2fLmVjBhGwFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKYtNApxyeeQbjxjFCgHwuv0T2TJvFaU6QSQaMU_yr1nP4Y8Fg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1d66a1e5-ce44-448b-8407-31d5ed9bc10d@dunslane.net>
 <CAKYtNArQ-c8xfBaWOKBB6TPVM5Fd_d0v2UEpxk9f5BuKyrQYxQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKYtNArQ-c8xfBaWOKBB6TPVM5Fd_d0v2UEpxk9f5BuKyrQYxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/abhbSpewJZz0H999%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 10:32:11PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> Here, I am attaching an updated patch for the review. I removed the
> length check for host, port and format in pg_restore as we don't have
> check  in pg_dump also.

Looks generally reasonable to me.

> I think we don't need any test cases for host and port.

Why not?

> If we want to backpatch, then I can make patches for back branches but
> as of now, I am uploading a patch for master only.

-1 for back-patching.  --format seems to have been broken since pg_restore
was first committed in 2000 (commit 500b62b057), so I don't sense any
urgency here.  Not to mention that someone might be relying on the current
behavior.

> +command_fails_like(
> +	[ 'pg_restore', '-f -', '-F', 'p' ],
> +	qr/\Qpg_restore: error: archive format "p" is not supported; please use psql\E/,
> +	'pg_restore: unrecognized archive format p|plain');

How does this test relate to this change?

-- 
nathan