Hello Peter,
> I had noticed that most getopt() or getopt_long() calls had their letter
> lists in pretty crazy orders. There might have been occasional attempts
> at grouping, but those then haven't been maintained as new options were
> added. To restore some sanity to this, I went through and ordered them
> alphabetically.
I agree that a more or less random historical order does not make much
sense.
For pgbench, ISTM that sorting per functionality then alphabetical would
be better than pure alphabetical because it has 2 modes. Such sections
might be (1) general (2) connection (3) common/shared (4) initialization
and (5) benchmarking, we some comments on each.
What do you think? If okay, I'll send you a patch for that.
--
Fabien.
