Re: pg_utility ?

From: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_utility ?
Date: 2025-11-18 18:49:45
Message-ID: CAA5RZ0sfb=wZ2umD33pTwxbYO+Z=J=iQegfcFkhJCbT59Fh_cg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> pg_utility vacuum -t tab1 -t tab2 # what vacuumdb does
> pg_utility analyze -t tab1 -t tab2 # what vacuumdb -Z does
> pg_utility vacuum analyze -t tab1 -t tab2 # what vacuumdb -z does
> pg_utility cluster -t tab1 -t tab2 # what clusterdb does
> pg_utility reindex -t tab1 -t tab2 # what reindexdb does

Is the idea to get rid of most of bin/scripts and replace them with a single
pg_utility? or will it just be a wrapper for the existing utilities? meaning
they will still work stand-alone.

--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-11-18 18:54:11 Re: nbtree VACUUM's REDO routine doesn't clear page's VACUUM cycle ID
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2025-11-18 18:49:28 Re: Checkpointer write combining