On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > we found possible bug in pg_dump. It raise a error only when all specified > tables doesn't exists. When it find any table, then ignore missing other. > > /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_dump -t Foo -t omega -s postgres > /dev/null; echo > $? > > foo doesn't exists - it creates broken backup due missing "Foo" table > > [pavel@localhost include]$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_dump -t Foo -t omegaa -s > postgres > /dev/null; echo $? > pg_dump: No matching tables were found > 1 > > Is it ok? I am thinking, so it is potentially dangerous. Any explicitly > specified table should to exists.
Keep in mind that the argument to -t is a pattern, not just a table name. I'm not sure how much that affects the calculus here, but it's something to think about.
yes, it has a sense, although now, I am don't think so it was a good idea. There should be some difference between table name and table pattern.