Re: pg_ctl options - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: pg_ctl options
Date
Msg-id 1168135858.869.5.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_ctl options  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 20:14 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > pg_config would need short ones.
> > >
> > > Seems we should have some,
> > 
> > But why?  What is the use case?  It's not like pg_config is a frequently 
> > typed command.
> 
> I thought consistency.  Why do any of the commands have long and short
> options?

That would be my argument. Consistency is good.

Joshua D. Drake


> 
> 
-- 
     === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997            http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: InitPostgres and flatfiles question
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: InitPostgres and flatfiles question