| From: | Zdeněk Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Script binaries renaming |
| Date: | 2008-03-26 13:03:32 |
| Message-ID: | 47EA49A4.6020706@sun.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan napsal(a):
>
>
> Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
>> Question is also how many users really use these commands. For example
>> vacuumdb is not too important now when we have autovacuum.
>
> This is not true. Plenty of apps will quite reasonably choose to follow
> large batch updates by a single vacuumdb rather than using autovacuum.
Yes, up to 8.2, but I think situation for 8.3 could be different. We have more
works, autovacuum is better and so on.
> Incidentally, I am less opposed than some to some sensible renaming
> here, eventually. Perhaps we could take the opportunity to fix the
> naming of initdb, which confuses the heck out of many people.
Instead of renaming initdb extend pg_ctl (pg_ctl init) seems to me as a better idea.
Zdenek
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-03-26 13:14:05 | Re: Script binaries renaming |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-03-26 12:48:45 | Re: Script binaries renaming |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-03-26 13:14:05 | Re: Script binaries renaming |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2008-03-26 12:48:45 | Re: Script binaries renaming |