On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
Erik Jones <erik@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Feb 20, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Gregory Stark wrote:
I would suggest leaving out the && which only obfuscate what's
going on here.
PGOPTIONS=... pg_restore ...
would work just as well and be clearer about what's going on.
Right, that's just an unnecessary habit of mine.
Isn't that habit outright wrong? ISTM that with the && in there,
what you're doing is equivalent to
PGOPTIONS=whatever
pg_restore ...
This syntax will set PGOPTIONS for the remainder of the shell session,
causing it to also affect (say) a subsequent psql invocation. Which is
exactly not what is wanted.
It's even better than that. I don't see an "export" there, so it won't
take effect at all!
Matthew
--
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.
-- Ferenc Mantfeld
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
