RE: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Shinoda, Noriyoshi (PN Japan A&PS Delivery)
Subject RE: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?
Date
Msg-id TU4PR8401MB115291AE850BA7CF1AEB2F0BEEDD0@TU4PR8401MB1152.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

Sorry this email is not a discussion about word selection.
Since part of the manual had left pg_validatebackup in commit dbc60c5593f26dc777a3be032bff4fb4eab1ddd1.
I've attached a patch to fix this.

Regards,
Noriyoshi Shinoda

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 5:07 AM
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>; Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>; Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>;David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Subject: Re: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2020-04-12 11:21:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> We could also have an alternate name, like pgsql, and make 'pg' a
>> symlink to it that packagers can choose to omit.

> We could even name the non-abbreviated binary postgres :).

I shudder to imagine the confusion that would result.

            regards, tom lane



Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: backup manifests
Next
From: Patrick REED
Date:
Subject: Lexer issues