Re: Script binaries renaming - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Treat
Subject Re: Script binaries renaming
Date
Msg-id 200803280110.03566.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Script binaries renaming  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday 26 March 2008 12:17, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> > Tom Lane napsal(a):
> >> Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> >>> Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
> >>> output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
> >>
> >> Now we're into change for the sake of change?  Those programs don't
> >> have any naming problem.
> >
> > yes, but they are redundant
>
> Really? How so? They have overlapping functionality, but neither has a
> subset of the other's functionality.
>
> Possibly we should merge them, but that's a different issue, and in
> particular has nothing to do with renaming, so it doesn't belong in this
> thread.
>

Actually it does belong in this thread, at least in so much that we should 
probably think about if we really want to do a bunch of command renaming when 
there is a good chance we might want to change these names further in 
subsequent releases to address real problems.  (I'd be tempted to hold the 
cosmetic changes untill we bump to 9.0 anyway, when backward 
incompatabilities will make more sense)

One example of the above would be changing binaries to address the current 
sub-par support for multiple versions of postgres on a single machine, 
something like what debian/ubuntu have done with pg_lsclusters, 
pg_initcluster, pg_ctlcluster, etc...  istm a bad idea to rename initdb to 
pg_init in the next release for what are mostly cosmetic reasons if in the 
next 2 or 3 releases down the line we need to change it for more pratical 
reasons. 

(Side note: I know some people hate the debian changes to the various command 
utilities because of the confusion it creates when trying to help people with 
postgres; consider that at least those changes solve a class of problems, the 
proposed changes will cause far more problems for end-users / helpers, and 
for far less of a valid reason)

As for the problem faced by Sun, if they really have an issue with the naming 
system, theres no reason they can't rename the binaries themselves to match 
thier own naming standards since they control their own packages.  I use 
Solaris and this wouldn't bother me at all. 
-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Gurjeet Singh"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point)
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_standby for 8.2 (with last restart point)