Thread: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.
From
Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command. This actually suppresses NOTICE messages in the reindexdb shell command. Shouldn't those two behave the same, though? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command. > > This actually suppresses NOTICE messages in the reindexdb shell command. > Shouldn't those two behave the same, though? Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have to provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does vacuumdb? -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Suppress some NOTICE messages from REINDEX command.
From
Peter Eisentraut
Date:
> Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have > to provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does > vacuumdb? Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the corresponding SQL commands. The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright mistake. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Not sure. I don't think the shell command and the SQL command have > > to provide the same feedback. I don't think createuser does. Does > > vacuumdb? > > Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the > corresponding SQL commands. > > The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright > mistake. Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the >> corresponding SQL commands. >> >> The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright >> mistake. > Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal > people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted. I agree with Peter: that patch is a quick hack not a considered solution. As for "several people said they liked it", where? I don't see even one followup to http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-06/msg00049.php regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> Both createuser and vacuumdb provide the same feedback as the > >> corresponding SQL commands. > >> > >> The more I think about it, the patch that just went in is an outright > >> mistake. > > > Well, we had a lot of discussion when this patch was posted, and seveal > > people liked it. I need someone else to say they want it reverted. > > I agree with Peter: that patch is a quick hack not a considered solution. > > As for "several people said they liked it", where? I don't see even > one followup to > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2006-06/msg00049.php The issue is that the patch was at the end of a thread, and no one said they didn't like it, and no one said anything when it was placed in the patch queue. I take that as acceptance. But now that two people do not like it, patch reverted. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +