Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 1:49 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 08:41:32AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> >> Can someone describe a scenario where this (name of the binary not
> >> clearly indicating it's related postgres) causes issues in practice? On
> >> my system, there are ~1400 binaries in /usr/bin, and for the vast
> >> majority of them it's rather unclear where do they come from.
>
> Naming conflict because our binary names are too generic? createdb
> could for example be applied to any database, and not only Postgres.
> (I have 1600 entries in /usr/bin on a Debian installation.)
>

I generally agree with Tom that there is sufficient precedence here that we
don't need to worry about these conflicts per se. However I would add two
points where we might want to think:

1. createuser/dropuser are things that I don't consider good ways of
creating users anyway. I think we should just consider removing these
binaries. The SQL queries are better, more functional, and can be rolled
back as a part of a larger transaction.

2. initdb is not so much of a pressing issue but I think despite the
longer string, pg_ctl -D mydatadir init [options] would be clearer from a
new user perspective and pose less cognitive load.

>
> >>
> >> But it's not really an issue, because we have tools to do that
> >>
> >> 1) man
> >>
> >> 2) -h/--help
> >>
> >> 3) rpm -qf $file (and similarly for other packagers)
> >>
> >> 4) set --prefix to install binaries so separate directory (which some
> >> distros already do anyway)
> >>
> >> So to me this seems like a fairly invasive change (potentially breaking
> >> quite a few scripts/tools) just to address a minor inconvenience.
> >
> > +1.
>
> Yes, +1.
> --
> Michael
>

--
Best Regards,
Chris Travers
Head of Database

Tel: +49 162 9037 210 | Skype: einhverfr | www.adjust.com
Saarbrücker Straße 37a, 10405 Berlin