Re: pg_ctl options checking

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > > pg_ctl -D test -U foo start
> > > > pg_ctl -D test -W start
> > > > pg_ctl -D test -w stop
> > > > pg_ctl -D test -l fast stop
> > > > etc.. (16 possible error combinations in total now checked)
> > >
> > > I object to making these throw an error. It is very convenient to
> > > be able to alter the command line from start to stop to reload etc.
> > > without having to remove or rewrite all the options that are not
> > > really relevant for that particular operation.
> >
> > For a command as significant as pg_ctl, I can't see how making it
> > _convenient_ is a good argument.
>
> Well, loss of convenience is one argument in opposition to this change
> but I don't see any argument in _favor_ of this change other than
> "let's reject these option combinations", some of which seem perfectly
> valid.

Well, if the option combination makes no sense, it seems we should
reject it, no? Isn't that part of what we do with SQL too.

--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +