Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1z3Edq+CNRo4F=jBEzXNMidSskdm=cPcAZnOgdY2sivXw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?  (Christoph Berg <christoph.berg@credativ.de>)
Responses Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?  (Christoph Berg <christoph.berg@credativ.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Christoph Berg
<christoph.berg@credativ.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that we have vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages in 9.4, wouldn't
> it make sense to get rid of the analyze_new_cluster.sh file which
> pg_upgrade writes? The net content is a single line which could as
> well be printed by pg_upgrade itself. Instead of an lengthy
> explanation how to invoke that manually, there should be a short note
> and a pointer to some manual section. I think the chances of people
> reading that would even be increased.

That one line was longer in the past, it could become longer again in
the future.  I don't think we should toggle the presentation back and
forth from version to version depending how long it happens to be.

> Similary, I don't really see the usefulness of delete_old_cluster.sh
> as a file, when "rm -rf" could just be presented on the console for
> the admin to execute by cut-and-paste.

I certainly would not want to run rm -rf commands copied off the
console window.  A slip of the mouse (or the paste buffer) and
suddenly you are removing entirely the wrong level of the directory
tree.

But I wouldn't mind an option to suppress the creation of those files.

Cheers,

Jeff



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: replication commands and log_statements
Next
From: Christoph Berg
Date:
Subject: Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?