Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: James William Pye <james(dot)pye(at)icrossing(dot)com>, Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se>, Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, James William Pye <pgsql(at)jwp(dot)name>
Subject: Re: Adding a --quiet option to initdb
Date: 2006-01-26 10:36:15
Message-ID: 200601261136.16497.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

James William Pye wrote:
> Why should initdb give it [processing
> information] to the user if the user didn't request it in the first
> place?

Because it shows important information that we want the user to see.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-01-26 13:45:58 Re: PostgreSQL Solaris packages now in beta
Previous Message Dennis Bjorklund 2006-01-26 09:17:28 Re: -X flag in pg_dump

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-01-26 16:00:10 Re: BUG #2195: log_min_messages crash server when in DEBUG3 to
Previous Message ITAGAKI Takahiro 2006-01-26 04:08:55 Re: Fix overflow of bgwriter's request queue