Re: Confusing long option in pg_receivexlog/basebackup/dumpall

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Confusing long option in pg_receivexlog/basebackup/dumpall
Date: 2013-05-02 06:34:15
Message-ID: CABOikdN+QT_jLDVZL-P1HRf2X+xvXzZXVuYU3G84wa-raH+JvQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com
> wrote:

>
>>
>>
> In other tools too, like psql, you can pass a connection string with
> -d/--dbname, which is why I thought it would be best to use the same option
> for passing a connection string to pg_basebackup/pg_dumpall too.
>
>
Ah Ok. I was not aware that you can also pass a connection string to psql
with -d option. That way it looks consistent though still confusing.

> See discussion at http://www.postgresql.org/**message-id/512520FE.6050701@
> **vmware.com<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/512520FE.6050701@vmware.com>.
> If you have any better ideas, I'm all ears...
>
>
No, I don't have better ideas. I was worried that it was an oversight. But
now I know it was chosen this way after a careful consideration.

Thanks,
Pavan

--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2013-05-02 06:50:29 Re: Confusing comment in xlog.c or am I missing something?
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2013-05-02 06:27:00 Re: Confusing comment in xlog.c or am I missing something?