| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Youki Shiraishi <shiraishi(at)computer(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add comments for a postgres program in bootstrap mode |
| Date: | 2019-09-27 04:03:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20190927040312.GD8485@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:29:08PM +0900, Youki Shiraishi wrote:
> I also vote to get rid of such ambiguous stuff.
> As you can see by grepping, "bootstrap-mode backend" (and something
> like that) is also called in the sources as:
>
> - bootstrap backend
> - (basic) bootstrap process
> - backend running in bootstrap mode
> - postgres (backend) program in bootstrap mode
> - bootstrapper
>
> I think "bootstrap backend" is a strong candidate for an alternative
> of "bootstrapper" because it is used in the official documentation of
> initdb.
It seems to me that "backend running in bootstrap mode" would be the
most consistent way to define that state in a backend process:
$ git grep -i "bootstrap mode backend" | wc -l
0
$ git grep -i "bootstrap-mode" | wc -l
0
$ git grep -i "bootstrap mode" | wc -l
68
$ git grep -i "bootstrap process" | wc -l
9
"bootstrapper" sounds weird. My 2c.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2019-09-27 04:12:24 | Re: Add comments for a postgres program in bootstrap mode |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-09-27 03:55:50 | Re: tab complete for explain SETTINGS |