Re: BUG #17148: About --no-strict-names option and --quiet option of pg_amcheck command - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Euler Taveira
Subject Re: BUG #17148: About --no-strict-names option and --quiet option of pg_amcheck command
Date
Msg-id 429f6e0e-31eb-4741-8bf8-e9e827b3076d@www.fastmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #17148: About --no-strict-names option and --quiet option of pg_amcheck command  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Responses Re: BUG #17148: About --no-strict-names option and --quiet option of pg_amcheck command  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-bugs


On Tue, Aug 17, 2021, at 12:57 PM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2021, at 16:53, Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021, at 8:06 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

>> ..I think we should reconcile them with
>> something like this while in here and fixing things anyways:

> I suggest that it should be a message that we already use in another binaries
> such as "do not print any output, except for errors".

Well, problem is that it’s plain not true.  If you pass --quiet --verbose you
will get a lot of output, albeit less than if not using --quiet.  Consistency
with other tools is obviously good, but only when it’s correct IMO.
Indeed, it is not a good design. It should be one option --verbose that
increases the verbosity according to a number or an enum value. --verbose=0
means "quiet". However, that ship has sailed.


--
Euler Taveira

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #17150: Unexpected outputs from the query
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17150: Unexpected outputs from the query