Re: [HACKERS] Re: HISTORY for 6.5.2

I think I can safely speak for a newbie and I happen to dislike
createdb etc as well. I started out with postgreSQL with the
intention of writing an application-specific CORBA front-end
to it, so I cared most about the C++ interface. The existence of
the createdb command confused me for a while, leaving me thinking
I could do INSERT and SELECT etc from libpq++, but would have
to resort to UNIX calls to do createdb.

--Yu Cao

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, The Hermit Hacker wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>
> >
> > On 20-Sep-99 The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > > On Sat, 18 Sep 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have been thinking, the destroy should be drop, in keeping with SQL.
> > >> destroy was a QUEL'ism.
> > >
> > > {create,destroy}{user,db} should be drop'd, personally...admins should use
> > > the SQL commands directly...
> >
> > I think it'd be better if they were kept. They're really convenient for
> > the newbie (I just introduced someone to PostgreSQL and all the way thru
> > were references to MySQL, including the create user, db, etc. scripts).
>
> My personal dislike for them is that they are incomplete...CREATE USER and
> CREATE DATABASE have a helluva lot of options available to it...using
> createuser, you don't know/learn abotu them...
>
> Force the admin to learn what they are doing...if they want to create
> short cut scripts, let *them* do it...