|From:||Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>|
|To:||Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: [patch] pg_ctl init extension|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
thanks for your useful comments. I attached new doc patch version. I
removed example changes and add link to create database cluster (I hope)
everywhere. Please, look on it and let me know if there is still
something what should be changed.
Greg Smith píše v ne 06. 12. 2009 v 22:29 -0500:
> I just noticed that there was an updated patch here that never made its
> way onto the CommitFest app listing. I just fixed that and took a quick
> look at it. I was in favor of this code change, but I have to say even
> I don't really like how it ended up getting documented--and I'm sure
> there are others would be downright hostile toward it.
> The biggest problem is that all of the places that used to say
> "<command><initdb>" when talking about creating a cluster now just say
> "database cluster initialization"--with no link to a section covering
> that topic. That's not a good forward step. The part I'm more
> favorable toward that I expect other people to really cringe at is that
> the examples showing how to manually run initdb have all been switched
> to use "pg_ctl initdb" too.
> If we're going to have a smooth transition toward supporting both styles
> of working in the next release, I think what needs to happen to the
> documentation here is adding a very clear section saying that "initdb"
> and "pg_ctl initdb" are the same thing, and noting why both forms
> exist. Maybe a short note in both pg_ctl and initdb pointing at each
> other; not sure yet what's best. Then update all the current places
> that say "initdb" that have been rewritten in this doc patch to
> "database cluster initialization" to reference things appropriate still.
> Going as far as making all the examples exclusively use the pg_ctl form
> right now is probably more than the community at large wants to handle
> just yet I suspect. At best, maybe we could make some or all of those
> either use both forms, or link them to the new discussion of
> alternatives section.
> I'm glad we made some progress (and are basically at code complete now)
> on this patch this round. Given that this patch doesn't have a large
> amount of support, I think that the remaining work here is fine-tuning
> the documentation to cover the new option available without introducing
> and abrupt change people won't like. I'm going to mark this "returned
> with feedback" for now since I think that's going to take a bit more
> work than we really have time for right now, particularly given the
> limited number of people who care about this change. Zdenek, once this
> CommitFest clears out, I can help out with getting the documentation
> parts here smoothed over so this is in proper shape to commit during the
> next one; I don't think there's anything left you need to do.
|Next Message||Kevin Grittner||2009-12-07 16:28:41||Re: [HACKERS] New PostgreSQL Committers|
|Previous Message||Euler Taveira de Oliveira||2009-12-07 16:15:57||Re: EXPLAIN BUFFERS|