Thread: pg_walsummary, Character-not-present-in-option

pg_walsummary, Character-not-present-in-option

From
btsugieyuusuke
Date:
Hi hackers,
I found probably something to fix in pg_walsummary.

pg_walsummary specifies “f:iqw:” as the third argument of getopt_long().

> /* process command-line options */
> while ((c = getopt_long(argc, argv, "f:iqw:",
>                 long_options, &optindex)) != -1)

However, only i and q are valid options.

>     switch (c)
>     {
>         case 'i':
>             break;
>         case 'q':
>             opt.quiet = true;
>             break;
>         default:
>             /* getopt_long already emitted a complaint */
>             pg_log_error_hint("Try \"%s --help\" for more information.", 
> progname);
>             exit(1);
>     }

Therefore, shouldn't “f:” and “w:” be removed?

Best regards,
Yusuke Sugie



Re: pg_walsummary, Character-not-present-in-option

From
Tom Lane
Date:
btsugieyuusuke <btsugieyuusuke@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
>> Therefore, shouldn't “f:” and “w:” be removed?

Looks like that to me too.  Pushed.

            regards, tom lane



Re: pg_walsummary, Character-not-present-in-option

From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 12:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> btsugieyuusuke <btsugieyuusuke@oss.nttdata.com> writes:
> >> Therefore, shouldn't “f:” and “w:” be removed?
>
> Looks like that to me too.  Pushed.

Thanks to Yusuke-san for the report and patch and to Tom for the
commit. I vaguely recall that early in the development of
pg_walsummary I thought it was going to need more options than and
then realized that some of them weren't necessary. Looks like I did a
bad job removing the leftovers; thanks for cleaning it up.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com