Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A58C65089D for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:48:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 45660-02-6 for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:48:23 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com (mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.1]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3AF86508F0 for ; Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:41:02 -0300 (ADT) X-Trace: 59858949/mk-outboundfilter-5.mail.uk.tiscali.com/F2S/$F2S-NILDRAM-ACCEPTED/f2s-temporary-group/85.211.229.155 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 85.211.229.155 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: simon@2ndquadrant.com X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwAAI1egkhV0+Wb/2dsb2JhbAAIrTM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,216,1215385200"; d="scan'208";a="59858949" X-IP-Direction: IN Received: from 85-211-229-155.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk (HELO [192.168.0.3]) ([85.211.229.155]) by smtp.f2s.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 20 Jul 2008 05:40:59 +0100 Subject: Re: pg_dump additional options for performance From: Simon Riggs To: Stephen Frost Cc: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <20080720030749.GA18846@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20080720030749.GA18846@tamriel.snowman.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:47:09 +0100 Message-Id: <1216529229.19656.835.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200807/185 X-Sequence-Number: 6879 On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 23:07 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Simon, > > I agree with adding these options in general, since I find myself > frustrated by having to vi huge dumps to change simple schema things. > A couple of comments on the patch though: > > - Conflicting option handling > I think we are doing our users a disservice by putting it on them to > figure out exactly what: > multiple object groups cannot be used together > means to them. You and I may understand what an "object group" is, > and why there can be only one, but it's a great deal less clear than > the prior message of > options -s/--schema-only and -a/--data-only cannot be used together > My suggestion would be to either list out the specific options which > can't be used together, as was done previously, or add a bit of (I > realize, boring) code and actually tell the user which of the > conflicting options were used. > > - Documentation > When writing the documentation I would stress that "pre-schema" and > "post-schema" be defined in terms of PostgreSQL objects and why they > are pre vs. post. > > - Technically, the patch needs to be updated slightly since another > pg_dump-related patch was committed recently which also added > options and thus causes a conflict. > > Beyond those minor points, the patch looks good to me. Thanks for the review. I'll make the changes you suggest. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support