Re: script binaries renaming - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Zdenek Kotala
Subject Re: script binaries renaming
Date
Msg-id 468FCCDF.7050209@sun.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: script binaries renaming  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: script binaries renaming  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 6, 2007, at 5:53 , Dave Page wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>>>
>>>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>>>>
>>>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>>>
>>> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
>>> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
>>> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.
>>
>> While the change might be awkward, the names of these binaries really
>> should be namespaced in some way. The current just too generic to be
>> throwing into a bin/ directory in my opinion.
>
> Of course I realize that I voted for the idea in the first place. I
> voted for it for consistency more than anything but as I think about it,
> it really is clunky and doesn't serve any real purpose.
>

There is group of people who has different opinion. The main reasons for
this patch are 1) names could collide with system tools 2) it is
confusing for lot of users - typically for newbies and me :-) 3) it is
not consistent with naming convention.

I started to use postgres since version 6.5 and these names of script
utilities are still confusing for me.

By the way my original idea was create new command "pg_cmd", which
integrates all in one include missing commands(e.g. createtablespace).


        Zdenek

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Zdenek Kotala
Date:
Subject: Re: script binaries renaming
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: dblink connection security