From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/ oc/src/sgml/manage-ag.sgml oc/sr ... |
Date: | 2003-03-21 17:05:36 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0303211443380.2387-100000@peter.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes:
> > for d in $(psql -l --somthing); do vacuum $d; done
> If you have a real shell (and know how to use it), sure. Is such a
> solution acceptable to all those Windows users we're hoping to attract?
I don't know how Windows users typically manage their systems, but if they
use batch files they can also write a similar loop with the native shell.
(I just tried it.)
My problem with a program that runs a command for all databases is that it
is too rigid: What if you want to run maintenance only on some databases
(owned by you, big/small, even/odd, starting with 'x')? --- Cannot use
it, back to the manual approach.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian - CVS | 2003-03-21 17:11:46 | pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/ref declare.sgml |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian - CVS | 2003-03-21 15:43:02 | pgsql-server/src/backend/commands tablecmds.c |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-03-21 17:12:22 | Re: cursors: SCROLL default, error messages |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-03-21 17:03:27 | Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign |