Re: Command tags in create/drop scripts - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Hammond
Subject Re: Command tags in create/drop scripts
Date
Msg-id 1181065959.618700.42900@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Command tags in create/drop scripts  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Command tags in create/drop scripts  ("Jim C. Nasby" <decibel@decibel.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jun 5, 9:19 am, alvhe...@commandprompt.com (Alvaro Herrera) wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >Bruce Momjian <b...@momjian.us> writes:
> > >>Is this a TODO?
>
> > >I don't think so; there is no demand from anybody but Zdenek to remove
> > >those programs.  Has it ever even come up before?
>
> Personally I found really strange to have "createuser" and "createdb"
> shipped by Postgres when I started using it.  I just didn't complain.

+1. Given the prevalence of the pg_foo convention, those names are
clunky. So is initdb. I'm less creative than Zdenek, so I'd suggest
simply renaming to pg_createuser and friends with the same command
line options as the originals. Have the binaries check $0 and emit a
warning about using the deprecated name to STDERR if called by a name
that doesn't have the pg_ prefix. Default to symlinking the old names
for backwards compatibility until 9.0.

Andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Implicit casts with generic arrays
Next
From: Chander Ganesan
Date:
Subject: Re: CREATEROLE, CREATEDB