| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Does it make sense to add a -q (quiet) flag to initdb? |
| Date: | 2016-10-25 22:27:51 |
| Message-ID: | 05b8e11c-f368-7a9f-e165-0ca429fc3d40@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/25/16 11:26 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Per: https://www.commandprompt.com/blog/can_i_make_initdb_quiet/
>
> This was a question that was asked on #postgresql. Obviously we found a
> work around but I wonder if it makes sense to add a -q to solve some of
> these issues? (I could see it being useful with automation).
Well, there's always pg_ctl initdb -s (not sure why it's -s instead of
the more common -q...). ISTM it'd be better to point people that
direction, but a silent option to initdb certainly wouldn't hurt (and
would maybe simplify pg_ctl as well...)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-10-25 22:44:22 | Re: Improving RLS planning |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-25 21:58:21 | Improving RLS planning |