From: | "Daniel Westermann (DWE)" <daniel(dot)westermann(at)dbi-services(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_basebackup and error messages dependent on the order of the arguments |
Date: | 2024-09-30 17:56:51 |
Message-ID: | GV0P278MB0419BDE2D5D3E2C5C19EF411D2762@GV0P278MB0419.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>I wrote:
>> As this example shows, we really ought to validate the compression
>> argument on sight in order to get sensible error messages. The
>> trouble is that for server-side compression the code wants to just
>> pass the string through to the server and not form its own opinion
>> as to whether it's a known algorithm.
>> Perhaps it would help if we simply rejected strings beginning
>> with a dash? I haven't tested, but roughly along the lines of
>Taking a closer look, many of the other switches-requiring-an-argument
>also just absorb "optarg" without checking its value till much later,
>so I'm not sure how far we could move the needle by special-casing
>--compress.
My point was not so much about --compress but rather giving a good error message.
Looking at this:
$ pg_basebackup --checkpoint=fast --format=t --compress --pgdata=/var/tmp/dummy
pg_basebackup: error: must specify output directory or backup target
... the error message is misleading and will confuse users more than it helps.
Regards
Daniel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Jones | 2024-09-30 18:16:09 | Re: Psql meta-command conninfo+ |
Previous Message | Laurenz Albe | 2024-09-30 17:17:38 | Re: On disable_cost |