Thread: Removing postgres -f command line option
While looking at Shigeru Hanada's foreign join pushdown patch, I noticed a command line option that I didn't know to exist: $ postgres --help ... Developer options: -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types That doesn't include all the options we support, the documentation lists: s|i|o|b|t|n|m|h. These are aliases for enable_* planner options, e.g -fs is equal to enable_seqscan=off. That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether? -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > While looking at Shigeru Hanada's foreign join pushdown patch, I noticed a > command line option that I didn't know to exist: > > $ postgres --help > ... > Developer options: > -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types > > That doesn't include all the options we support, the documentation lists: > s|i|o|b|t|n|m|h. These are aliases for enable_* planner options, e.g -fs is > equal to enable_seqscan=off. > > That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c > enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether? No. Seems useless to me. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue nov 17 10:14:21 -0300 2011: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:19 AM, Heikki Linnakangas > <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > While looking at Shigeru Hanada's foreign join pushdown patch, I noticed a > > command line option that I didn't know to exist: > > > > $ postgres --help > > ... > > Developer options: > > -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types > > > > That doesn't include all the options we support, the documentation lists: > > s|i|o|b|t|n|m|h. These are aliases for enable_* planner options, e.g -fs is > > equal to enable_seqscan=off. > > > > That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c > > enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether? > > No. Seems useless to me. Dunno. It seems awfully convenient if you're testing optimizer stuff that requires turning one of these off, though of course I haven't ever done that. The alternative requires a lot more keystrokes. It doesn't matter to me either way, though. (To be honest I wasn't aware of these options -- not sure if I'll use them in the future) $ PGOPTIONS=-fs psql psql (9.2devel) Digite «help» para obtener ayuda. alvherre=# show enable_seqscan ;enable_seqscan ----------------off (1 fila) $ PGOPTIONS="-c enable_seqscan=0" psql psql (9.2devel) Digite «help» para obtener ayuda. alvherre=# show enable_seqscan ;enable_seqscan ----------------off (1 fila) -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Heikki, On 17.11.2011 10:19, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > $ postgres --help > ... > Developer options: > -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types > > That doesn't include all the options we support, the documentation > lists: s|i|o|b|t|n|m|h. These are aliases for enable_* planner > options, e.g -fs is equal to enable_seqscan=off. > > That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c > enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether? > I knew about it. But - I never needed it and I always scroll over it when I show --help in my trainings. When I was young - some when in last century - I learned that you never should remove a feature without pre-announcing it as deprecated. I think it is better to mark it deprecated in 9.2 and totally remove it in 9.3. Susanne -- Susanne Ebrecht - 2ndQuadrant PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services www.2ndQuadrant.com
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> While looking at Shigeru Hanada's foreign join pushdown patch, I noticed
> a command line option that I didn't know to exist:
> $ postgres --help
> ...
> Developer options:
> -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types
Hmm, I thought I'd fixed that help message to match reality recently.
> That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c
> enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether?
I use it. See also src/test/regress/regressplans.sh, which would become
greatly less wieldy if it had to spell out the switches long-form.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > > While looking at Shigeru Hanada's foreign join pushdown patch, I noticed > > a command line option that I didn't know to exist: > > > $ postgres --help > > ... > > Developer options: > > -f s|i|n|m|h forbid use of some plan types > > Hmm, I thought I'd fixed that help message to match reality recently. > > > That seems completely useless to me, because you can also do "-c > > enable_seqscan=off". Any objections to removing the -f option altogether? > > I use it. See also src/test/regress/regressplans.sh, which would become > greatly less wieldy if it had to spell out the switches long-form. I think it is hard to argue that such a user-visible flag is reasonable, even if it helps backend developers avoid some keystrokes. I think flags used only by backend developers should be things that can _only_ be done with flags. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> I think it is hard to argue that such a user-visible flag is
> reasonable, even if it helps backend developers avoid some keystrokes.
> I think flags used only by backend developers should be things that can
> _only_ be done with flags.
Huh? By that argument, we should remove every single postmaster command
line switch except "-c var=value", because all the other ones are
shorthands for that --- Peter went to some lengths awhile ago to make
that true.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > I think it is hard to argue that such a user-visible flag is > > reasonable, even if it helps backend developers avoid some keystrokes. > > > I think flags used only by backend developers should be things that can > > _only_ be done with flags. > > Huh? By that argument, we should remove every single postmaster command > line switch except "-c var=value", because all the other ones are > shorthands for that --- Peter went to some lengths awhile ago to make > that true. I was talking about developer-use-only flags. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +