Re: pg_encoding not needed anymore

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_encoding not needed anymore
Date: 2004-04-20 13:57:10
Message-ID: 40852C36.40309@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>Karel Zak wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>
>>>With initdb written now in C, we don't need a pg_encoding binary
>>>anymore.
>>>
>>>
>> By the way, what change the name of "initdb" to "pg_initdb". The
>> current name is really too common (like some others things in
>> pgsql/src/bin)
>>
>>
>
>Uh, that would be pretty major. No one has complained about it in the
>past. I think createuser is much worse. :-)
>
>
>
Agreed. Actually, the big problem with the name "initdb" is that the
name is misleading, and newbies often get confused by it. You are
preparing a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I
think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken
Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go
back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a
better name.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-04-20 14:03:28 Re: Triggers on system tables
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-04-20 13:39:58 Re: CSV patch applied