Re: drop postmaster symlink

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: drop postmaster symlink
Date: 2023-01-25 07:54:27
Message-ID: 7165e051-94c7-4e14-ff0a-043b34c67e9e@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12.01.23 20:11, Devrim Gündüz wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-01-12 at 13:35 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
>> To be clear, I am completely in agreement with you about removing the
>> symlink. I just wanted to be sure Devrim was alerted because I knew
>> he had a strong opinion on this topic ;-)
>
> Red Hat's own packages, thus their users may be unhappy about that,
> too. They also call postmaster directly.

Devrim,

Apart from your concerns, it appears there is consensus for making this
change. The RPM packaging scripts can obviously be fixed easily for
this. Do you have an objection to making this change?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2023-01-25 07:56:17 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2023-01-25 07:46:36 Re: Record queryid when auto_explain.log_verbose is on