| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, José Arthur Benetasso Villanova <jose(dot)arthur(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: directory archive format for pg_dump |
| Date: | 2010-12-16 20:26:20 |
| Message-ID: | 4D0A75EC.6080708@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 16.12.2010 22:13, Robert Haas wrote:
> So how bad would it be if we committed this new format without support
> for splitting large relations into multiple files, or with some stub
> support that never actually gets used, and fixed this later? Because
> this is starting to sound like a bigger project than I think we ought
> to be requiring for this patch.
Would probably be fine, as long as we don't paint ourselves in the corner.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-12-16 20:28:40 | Re: directory archive format for pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-12-16 20:25:22 | Re: Extensions, patch v18 (merge against master, bitrot-only-fixes) |