From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Fred (dot)Flintstone" <eldmannen(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)adjust(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system |
Date: | 2019-03-27 14:52:29 |
Message-ID: | 20190327145229.GA19492@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-pkg-debian |
On 2019-Mar-27, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On 2019-Mar-27, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> >> I think the consensus in this thread (and the previous ancient ones) is
> >> that it's not worth it. It's one thing to introduce new commands with the
> >> pg_ prefix, and it's a completely different thing to rename existing ones.
> >> That has inherent costs, and as Tom pointed out the burden would fall on
> >> people using PostgreSQL (and that's rather undesirable).
>
> > I thought the consensus was to rename them, and install symlinks to the
> > old names.
>
> The question is what's the endgame. We haven't actually fixed the
> complained-of confusion problem unless we eventually remove createuser
> and dropuser under those names.
Well, partly we have, because there mere act of having a symlink
documents the command via the symlink target.
Somebody proposed to rename createuser not to pg_createuser, though, but
rather to pg_createrole; ditto dropuser. That seems to make sense.
I additionally proposed (nobody replied to this part) that we could have
the command print a WARNING if the argv[0] is shown to be the old name.
Not necessarily in pg12; maybe we can have them print such a warning in
pg13, and then remove the old names three years from now, or something
like that.
I suppose that if you're a Postgres developer, you naturally expect that
"createdb" creates a Postgres DB. What if you use multiple database
systems, and then only occasionally have to do DBA tasks? I find this
POV that createdb doesn't need renaming a bit self-centered.
> Are we prepared to force script breakage of that sort, even over a
> multi-year deprecation cycle?
Why not?
> (As a comparison point, I note that we still haven't removed the
> "postmaster" symlink, though it's been deprecated for at least a
> dozen years.)
I don't think that change was because of executable namespace pollution
or user confusion. (Commit 5266f221a2e1, can't find the discussion
though.)
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-27 14:57:36 | Re: speeding up planning with partitions |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-03-27 14:45:18 | Re: jsonpath |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Reid Thompson | 2019-03-27 15:02:29 | Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-27 14:41:27 | Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system |