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

Use of "postmaster"

From: "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Subject: Use of "postmaster"
Date: 2007-10-03 22:27:50
Message-ID: 37ed240d0710031527r5279b336m9dfc0f48a257be90@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Now that we've renamed the server binary to "postgres", what is the
status on use of the name "postmaster"?  Is it now deprecated?  And if
not, is there any point in keeping it around?

I've come across the occasional reference to "postmaster" in the FAQs
and I was thinking that this would confuse newer users.  Anyone
getting started with postgres since the rename probably won't know
what a "postmaster" is.  Phrases like "check whether the postmaster is
running" won't make any sense.

The manual (16.3 Starting the Database Server, and 1.2 Architectural
Fundamentals) now seems quite clear that "the database server program
is called postgres".  Seems it would be best to apply this
nomenclature consistently, and simply drop the name "postmaster" from
use.

Comments?

Regards,
BJ

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-10-03 22:45:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Use of "postmaster"
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-10-01 23:46:52
Subject: Re: PG on NFS may be just a bad idea

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-10-03 22:45:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Use of "postmaster"
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2007-10-03 21:39:07
Subject: Re: Getting to 8.3 beta1

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-10-03 22:45:30
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Use of "postmaster"
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-10-03 19:16:23
Subject: Re: OpenSSL Applink

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