| From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Voting: "pg_ctl init" versus "initdb" |
| Date: | 2009-11-16 03:16:01 |
| Message-ID: | 4B00C3F1.3040901@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>
>> If we did add an extra option then the option would be "initdb" not
>> "init". It would take us all years to remove all evidence of the phrase
>> "initdb" from the mailing lists and our minds.
>>
>
> "init" is already embedded in various packagers' initscripts. And
> I thought the entire point of this proposal was that we could expunge
> knowledge of initdb from users' minds.
Exactly. I think the best transition design would be to make "initdb"
and "init" both work.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Izmailov | 2009-11-16 04:07:34 | "money" binary representation |
| Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2009-11-16 01:55:34 | Re: Triggering from a specific column update |