From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
cc: "Radoulov, Dimitre" <cichomitiko@gmail.com>,
        pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Documentation clarification request: pg_dumpall and Large Objects
In-reply-to: <ae61f593b83ef62e5737c205a04498ea281b8a02.camel@cybertec.at>
References: 
 <CAGJBphSX2oMPPu=VM4U8NP4+qffFH_483tFQCJ_s-mOcN3DLDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <d4ab85597252c7a529f64ffd5cc5b09d92504df4.camel@cybertec.at>
 <CAGJBphS4TLNvAyNcWj_NSfer9SoDzco35apkT+8-wqXCthSK6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <b8358ac2148b9daf30c27b50a8cb9c8f2c4e40f9.camel@cybertec.at>
 <ae61f593b83ef62e5737c205a04498ea281b8a02.camel@cybertec.at>
Comments: In-reply-to Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
	message dated "Fri, 27 Feb 2026 23:23:35 +0100"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1844991.1774806911.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2026 13:55:11 -0400
Message-ID: <1844992.1774806911@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1844992.1774806911%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> Commit 763aaa06f0 has changed the situation: with the addition of other =
formats
> than the plain format, it no longer makes sense to say that pg_dumpall
> is not useful for backup.  Still, we should clarify what is *not* includ=
ed.

> The attached patch does that and in passing improves the readability.

Pushed with trivial grammatical adjustments.  I also failed to resist
the temptation to improve the newly-added text nearby.

			regards, tom lane