7.3 Beta Schema and pg_dump

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

I have been playing with schema's under 7.3beta and now I am trying to
use pg_dump. Is there a way to just dump 1 of my schema out?

Nope; I intended to make that happen, but didn't get around to it.

regards, tom lane

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump, looking at the code, it seems that only a couple of queries would
need to be changed and a command line option (-N, --namespace=) would need to be added.

If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

Thanks
Jim

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

regards, tom lane

On Mon, 16 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

I'd love to have this feature. What's about contrib/ ?

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Regards,
Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

Tom Lane writes:

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

I do not believe Jim's premise that it would only take a couple of changes
to a couple of queries. Clearly, it would take at least some change to
any query that reads information about schema-aware objects. And it needs
to be made backward compatible. And what about cross-schema dependencies?

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:

Tom Lane writes:

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

I do not believe Jim's premise that it would only take a couple of changes
to a couple of queries. Clearly, it would take at least some change to
any query that reads information about schema-aware objects.

Actually, my vision of this was not to change any queries at all, but
just to modify the pg_dump code to include a "select this schema" option.
The infrastructure is already there in pg_dump to mark individual schemas
as to be dumped or not --- we only need a command-line option that can
mark them.

And what about cross-schema dependencies?

Given the lack of any dependency tracing in pg_dump at the moment, I
think we just leave that on the user's head for now. It's not any worse
than the behavior of -t, which is perfectly capable of giving you an
incomplete dump.

regards, tom lane

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

I don't see a huge reason to stick to that rule in this instance...

Chris

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

"Jim Buttafuoco" <jim@contactbda.com> writes:

This seems like a "must" have option for pg_dump,
If I was to create a patch would it make it into 7.3?

I dunno ... I'd like to have it too, but it would break our "no new
features during beta" rule. Comments anyone?

I don't see a huge reason to stick to that rule in this instance...

Reclassify it as a bug ... problem solved. ;-)

Actually, it is sort of a bug because it is something we should have
added for schemas but forgot.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073