Re: Script binaries renaming

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Zdeněk Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Script binaries renaming
Date: 2008-03-26 12:48:45
Message-ID: 47EA462D.10304@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
> Question is also how many users really use these commands. For example
> vacuumdb is not too important now when we have autovacuum.

This is not true. Plenty of apps will quite reasonably choose to follow
large batch updates by a single vacuumdb rather than using autovacuum.

Incidentally, I am less opposed than some to some sensible renaming
here, eventually. Perhaps we could take the opportunity to fix the
naming of initdb, which confuses the heck out of many people.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdeněk Kotala 2008-03-26 13:03:32 Re: Script binaries renaming
Previous Message Zdeněk Kotala 2008-03-26 12:38:41 Re: Script binaries renaming

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zdeněk Kotala 2008-03-26 13:03:32 Re: Script binaries renaming
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2008-03-26 12:45:37 \password in psql help