From: | Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo(dot)santamaria(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Cc: | Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Bug fix in initdb output |
Date: | 2021-03-02 00:28:57 |
Message-ID: | CAC+AXB1jeyVPkAo96cJQpGU-DKwVurCHvumsjub28_914fQa=g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 10:18 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
wrote:
> On 2021-Mar-01, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
>
> > Uhm, now that you point it out, an absolute path would make the message
> > more consistent and reusable.
>
> Well. This code was introduced in a00c58314745, with discussion at
>
> http://postgr.es/m/CAHeEsBeAe1FeBypT3E8R1ZVZU0e8xv3A-7BHg6bEOi=jZny2Uw@mail.gmail.com
> which did not touch on the point of the pg_ctl path being relative or
> absolute. The previous decision to use relative seems to have been made
> here in commit ee814b4511ec, which was backed by this discussion
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/200411020134.52513.peter_e%40gmx.net
>
> So I'm not sure that anybody would love me if I change it again to
> absolute.
>
For me it is a +1 for the change to absolute. Let's see if more people want
to weigh in on the matter.
Regards,
Juan José Santamaría Flecha
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-03-02 00:32:28 | Re: Why does the BF sometimes not dump regression.diffs? |
Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2021-03-02 00:12:21 | Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[] |