Andrew Dunstan <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 6/10/21 2:23 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Ouch. That looks like a plain old bug. Let's fix it. IIRC I just used >> the same logic that we use for pg_dump's --exclude-* options, so we need >> to check if they have similar issues. > Peter Eisentraut has pointed out to me that this is documented, albeit a > bit obscurely for pg_dumpall. But it is visible on the pg_dump page. Hmm. > Nevertheless, it's a bit of a POLA violation as we've seen above, and > I'd like to get it fixed, if there's agreement, both for this pg_dumpall > option and for pg_dump's pattern matching options. +1, but the -performance list isn't really where to hold that discussion. Please start a thread on -hackers. regards, tom lane
