Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options
Date: 2001-10-11 21:32:42
Message-ID: 200110112132.f9BLWgJ18058@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Would someone give me a status on this?

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

> Hi all,
>
> There seem to be a few namespace conflicts for the options of postgres
> and postmaster. The one's I could identify from the man pages are :
>
> -i -N -o -p -S -s
>
> If we are going to deprecate -o, then we'll need to make sure we also
> introduce replacement names where these conflicts are. This way, in the
> future -o can be treated like a 'no-option' and everything would work.
>
> If we notify of the impending deprecation now, to actually occur in 7.3,
> would we be best intoducing alternative option names somewhere in the
> 7.2 beta cycle so people writing scripts for 7.2 can use the new names
> and know their scripts will work into the future?
>
> ???
>
> Regards and best wishes,
>
> Justin Clift
>
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee> writes:
> > > I am suggesting this.
> > > [ code snipped ]
> >
> > Okay, that would mean that "-o '-S nnn'" still works, but "-o -F"
> > doesn't.
> >
> > But ... the thing is, there is no reason for -o to exist anymore other
> > than backwards compatibility with existing startup scripts. -o doesn't
> > do anything you can't do more cleanly and sanely with GUC options
> > (--sort_mem, etc). So, I don't really see much value in keeping it
> > if you're going to break one of the more common usages --- which I'm
> > sure -o -F is.
> >
> > Since the problem I identified is not likely to bite very many people,
> > my vote is not to try to apply a code solution now. I think we should
> > leave the code alone, and instead document in 7.2 that -o is deprecated
> > (and explain what to do instead), with the intention of removing it in
> > 7.3. Giving people a release cycle's worth of notice seems sufficient.
> >
> > Possibly we could also take this opportunity to deprecate -S and the
> > other options that are standing in the way of unified command line
> > options for postmasters and backends.
> >
> > regards, tom lane
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
> --
> "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
> who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
> first group; there was less competition there."
> - Indira Gandhi
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rachit Siamwalla 2001-10-11 22:15:36 Re: Deadlock? idle in transaction
Previous Message Patrice Hédé 2001-10-11 21:23:36 Re: Unicode combining characters