| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup -k option |
| Date: | 2018-05-18 15:29:53 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEyzNo7JceoojEiHN5YyaUqUfyuqqLYmuFtATymMW+SrTw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > The new pg_basebackup -k option stands for --no-verify-checksums. That
> > is nearly the opposite of initdb -k, which is for enabling checksums. I
> > think it could be confusing to have two related tools use the same
> > option letter for nearly opposite purposes.
>
> > How about using capital -K in pg_basebackup? Or maybe it doesn't need a
> > short option at all.
>
> +1 for no short option.
>
+1 for that choice as well.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-05-18 15:29:55 | Re: master fails to build on Windows |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2018-05-18 15:26:19 | Re: pg_basebackup -k option |