Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: script binaries renaming

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: script binaries renaming
Date: 2008-04-02 02:12:05
Message-ID: 200804020212.m322C5k02202@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
FYI, the patch author and survey requestor has withdrawn the patch with
the following comment:

> I think we can reject this patch. I don't process yet output from survey
> on general, but it seems that more users prefer pg_ prefix, but idea of
> "pgc" command seems to be better. I think it is good idea for 9.0 release.

The TODO item has been removed as well:

	* Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
	
	  http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00025.php

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> Tom Lane napsal(a):
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> >> Where are we on this?  Tom thinks we don't want this.  TODO has:
> >> 	* Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
> >> 	  http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00025.php
> > 
> >> I think we need to make a decision.
> > 
> > Well, I don't have any particular objection to adding pg_ prefixes
> > as alternate names for the existing scripts.  However, it's not clear
> > what is the point unless we have the intention to remove the old names
> > at some time in the foreseeable future.  And the consensus of the
> > previous thread on -patches seemed to be that nobody except Zdenek
> > was very eager to do that.
> 
> Yeah, I have to had two reason for this patch. First is my personal, because I 
> don't like these names since 1999. And second is that Solaris architects do not 
> like these names. Especially createdb and createuser. It could clash with some 
> system utility.
> 
> > In any case, there is no value in discussing this further on -patches
> > since the readers of this list already weighed in.  If you want to
> > make a decision then it needs to be made on -hackers or -general.
> 
> I think both are important (maybe general is more important). Maybe we can put 
> also a survey on webpage.
> 
> On other side. The question is also if we really still need these utilities? If 
> you look on them there are missing features. E.g vacuumdb does not allow make 
> VACUUM FREEZ or set some modern version of vacuum parameters. There is not 
> createtablespace command and so on...
> 
> 		Zdenek

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-04-02 02:15:36
Subject: Update to patch queue web page
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2008-04-02 02:02:30
Subject: Re: column level privileges

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2008-04-02 04:54:18
Subject: Re: actualized SQL/PSM patch
Previous:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2008-04-01 23:19:10
Subject: Re: Consistent \d commands in psql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group