Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fred .Flintstone
Subject Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system
Date
Msg-id CAJgfmqUpFU0aYzemOZ7gSRtJV0=hoEePWrDG-hpqnwBiv-T+vg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system  ("Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
The binaries:
* clusterdb
* createdb
* createuser
* dropdb
* dropuser
* reindexdb
* vacuumdb

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 8:13 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> On 3/20/19 2:08 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2019-Mar-20, Euler Taveira wrote:
> >
> >> Em qua, 20 de mar de 2019 às 14:57, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu:
> >>>
> >>> We managed to get rid of createlang and droplang in v10, and there
> >>> hasn't been that much push-back about it.  So maybe there could be
> >>> a move to remove createuser/dropuser?  Or at least rename them to
> >>> pg_createuser and pg_dropuser.  But I think this was discussed
> >>> (again) during the v10 cycle, and we couldn't agree to do more than
> >>> get rid of createlang/droplang.
> >
> > Previous discussion:
> > https://postgr.es/m/CABUevExPrfPH5K5qM=zsT7tvfyACe+i5qjA6bfWCKKYrh8MJLw@mail.gmail.com
> >
> >> Votes? +1 to remove createuser/dropuser (and also createdb/dropdb as I
> >> said in the other email). However, if we don't have sufficient votes,
> >> let's at least consider a 'pg_' prefix.
> >
> > I vote to keep these rename these utilities to have a pg_ prefix and to
> > simultaneously install symlinks for their current names, so that nothing
> > breaks.
>
> This sounds like a reasonable plan, pending which binaries we feel to do
> that with.
>
> Pardon this naive question as I have not used such systems in awhile,
> but would this work on systems that do not support symlinks?
>
> Jonathan
>


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system