From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Removing binaries (was: createlang/droplang deprecated) |
Date: | 2017-03-19 14:20:01 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEyh3wzBSZ7oA+o5n5=bL5YFtM9B00ZGpvu9MLY0o4Ui=A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > createuser, dropuser - definitely pollutes the namespace, people do
> > sometimes try them for the wrong thing. Unlike the db ones they do add
> > value though -- I don't think we have a psql way of in a single command
> > doing what --pwprompt on createuser does, do we? But given that we are in
> > the process of breaking a lot of other scripts for 10, perhaps we should
> > rename it to pg_createuser?
>
> I'm not particularly on board with arguments like "we already broke a ton
> of stuff so let's break some more". Eventually you've managed to create
> a daunting barrier to upgrading at all.
>
The argument is more that if we are going to break it, now is a good time
to do it because we are already forcing people to review their scripts.
If we decide not to break it at all that's one thing. But if we *are* going
to break it, it's better to do it in 10 than in 11.
> I think a more reasonable way to proceed is to install symlinks
> pg_createuser -> createuser (or the other direction), mark the older names
> as deprecated, and announce that we'll remove the old names a few releases
> from now. That gives people time to adjust.
>
I'd suggest doing it in the other direction, but yeah, that seems like a
softer way to handle it. As long as we clearly document them as such.
Perhaps we should even have them output a little "hey you should be using
pg_xyz" if they are used by the wrong name, but I wonder if that might
break things.
Maybe we should handle createdb likewise, rather than just kicking it to
> the curb. I know I use it quite often; it's less typing than psql -c
> 'create database ...' postgres, and still would be with a pg_ prefix.
>
As long as they have a pg_ prefix, I don't see much harm in them being
there, they're tiny. It's not like they're a huge maintenance burden.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-03-19 14:25:24 | Re: Removing binaries (was: createlang/droplang deprecated) |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2017-03-19 14:17:50 | Re: Removing binaries (was: createlang/droplang deprecated) |