Re: createlang/droplang deprecated

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: createlang/droplang deprecated
Date: 2017-03-18 15:29:16
Message-ID: 680.1489850956@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> 2017-03-18 14:00 GMT+01:00 Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>:
>>> I just noticed that createlang and droplang have been listed as
>>> deprecated since PG 9.1.
>>> Do we dare remove them?

> (I'd extend it to all the non-prefixed pg binaries, but let's open that can
> of worms right now, one thing at a time)

To my mind, these two and createuser/dropuser are the only really serious
namespacing problems among our standard binaries. The ones with names
ending in "db" don't seem likely to cause huge confusion. I suppose that
if we were naming it today, "psql" wouldn't get that name; but the chances
of renaming that one are certainly zero, namespace conflict or no.

But createuser/dropuser are a real problem, because they certainly could
be mistaken for system-level utilities.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-03-18 16:50:40 Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2017-03-18 14:59:16 Re: background sessions