On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:02 AM Shinya Kato
<Shinya11.Kato@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, thank you for the reviews.
>
> On 2025-01-18 00:45, Robert Treat wrote:
> > This looks pretty good to me. I think there are a couple of minor
> > grammar changes that could be made, and I think the pg_dumpall section
> > could use a couple tweaks, specifically 1) not all incantations of
> > pg_dumpall emit psql meta commands (-g comes to mind quickly) and ISTR
> > some non-psql clients honor psql meta commands, so I would lessen the
> > language around incompatibility, and 2) I think adding an explicit -f
> > for the database name in the pg_dumpall is clearer, and mirrors the
> > pg_dump example.
>
> Thanks, I had no reason to oppose it, so I reflected that in the patch.
>
> On 2025-01-18 05:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net> writes:
> >> suggested diffs attached, let me know if you would like a consolidated
> >> patch
> >
> > Sadly, the cfbot is now confused since it doesn't understand the idea
> > of an incremental patch. Somebody please post a consolidated patch.
>
> I've attached new consolidated patch.
>
> > For myself, I'd suggest writing the examples with -X not --no-psqlrc.
> > -X is shorter, it's more likely to be what people would actually
> > type, and it's not jarringly inconsistent with the adjacent use
> > of -h and other short-form switches. We can write the added
> > paragraphs like
> >
> > It is generally recommended to use the <option>-X</option>
> > (<option>--no-psqlrc</option>) option when restoring a database ...
> >
> > to provide clarity about what the switch does.
>
> I agree to it and fixed the patch.
>
LGTM
Robert Treat
https://xzilla.net
