Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u
Date
Msg-id 51A57F23.4060208@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade -u  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 05/28/2013 07:55 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>> Perhaps just documenting the behavior is all that is needed, but -U is
>> everywhere and I think that's a good thing.
>
> [ moved to hacker ]
>
> Wow, I never realized other tools used -U for user, instead of -u.
> Should I change pg_upgrade to use -U for 9.4?  I can keep supporting -u
> as an undocumented option.

Yes, -U makes the most sense as that is what is used with the other 
tools. I think you should just drop -u, this isn't something people are 
doing everyday (like psql). The backward compatibility argument is 
pretty slim.

JD




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Planning incompatibilities for Postgres 10.0
Next
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump with postgis extension dumps rules separately