From: Greg Stark on 23 Jun 2010 06:20 On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(a)sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Uh, that doesn't fix anything: if you can't seek, a TOC at the end of > the file is useless. �And the cases where the writer can't seek are > likely to be identically the ones where the reader can't seek, viz > pg_dump piped to pg_restore (perhaps with some other programs between). That seems like a tenuous leap. A typical reason for the pipe is to transfer it to a different machine and that only has to be done once. But I'm not convinced it's such a great idea either for the reason I described -- It makes the case where pg_restore has to read through the whole archive that much harder to explain to users. So I'm not really going to argue for it too strongly. It's also a fair amount of extra complexity for not much gain. We would still need the fallback code anyways. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
First
|
Prev
|
Pages: 1 2 Prev: pg_upgrade issues Next: Implementation of Date/Time Input Interpretation |