| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
| Cc: | HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: (A) native Windows port |
| Date: | 2002-07-06 15:15:26 |
| Message-ID: | 22634.1025968526@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 12:39:13PM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
>> One other usability note: why can't postmaster perform the steps of
>> an initdb if -D points to an empty directory?
> Rank newbies shouldn't be protected in this way, partly because if
> something goes wrong, _they won't know what to do_. Please, please,
> don't be putting automagic, database destroying functions like that
> into the postmaster.
I agree completely with Andrew, even though an auto-initdb on an empty
directory presumably won't destroy any data. What it *does* do is
effectively mask a DBA error. We'll be getting panic-stricken support
calls/emails saying "all my databases are gone! Postgres sucks!" when
the problem is just that PG was restarted with the wrong -D pointer.
The existing behavior points that out loud and clear, in a context
where the DBA shouldn't have too much trouble figuring out what he
did wrong.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-06 15:20:16 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
| Previous Message | Al Arduengo | 2002-07-06 15:06:11 | Re: OID Errors |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-06 15:20:16 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-06 15:11:20 | Re: CLUSTER not lose indexes |