Re: Prevent printing "next step instructions" in initdb and pg_upgrade

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Prevent printing "next step instructions" in initdb and pg_upgrade
Date: 2020-11-25 17:03:48
Message-ID: 20201125170348.GB26300@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 10:33:09AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > I guess one option could be to just remove it, unconditionally. And
> > assume that any users who is running it manually read that in docs
> > somewhere that tells them what to do next, and that any user who's
> > running it under a wrapper will have the wrapper set it up?
>
> I could get behind that, personally. (1) I think most end-users don't
> run initdb by hand anymore. (2) The message is barely useful; what
> it mostly does is to distract your attention from the slightly
> more useful info printed ahead of it.

I think the question is not how many people who run initdb in any form
need the instructions to start Postgres, but how many who are actually
seeing the initdb output need those instructions. If someone isn't
seeing the initdb output, it doesn't matter what we output.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com

The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2020-11-25 17:23:56 Re: error_severity of brin work item
Previous Message Tom Lane 2020-11-25 16:43:27 Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority