From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Why does pg_checksums -r not have a long option? |
Date: | 2019-05-28 02:56:48 |
Message-ID: | 20190528025648.GA1348@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 10:17:43AM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> Before we switch to -f out of consistency with oid2name, we should
> consider Magnus' argument from
> CABUevEzoeXaxbcYmMZsNF1aqdCwovys7-ChqCuGRY5+nsQZFew(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com IMO:
>
> |I have no problem with changing it to -r. -f seems a bit wrong to me,
> |as it might read as a file. And in the future we might want to implement
> |the ability to take full filename (with path), in which case it would
> |make sense to use -f for that.
You could also use a long option for that without a one-letter option,
like --file-path or such, so reserving a one-letter option for a
future, hypothetical use is not really a stopper in my opinion. In
consequence, I think that that it is fine to just use -f/--filenode.
Any objections or better suggestions from other folks here?
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2019-05-28 03:54:34 | Re: BEFORE UPDATE trigger on postgres_fdw table not work |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2019-05-28 02:25:37 | Fix comment in pgcrypto tests |