On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 04:33:47PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote:
> On 26-08-2016 14:03, David Fetter wrote:
> > Would these make sense as pg_ctl options, or are you separating them
> > out because they're not instance-wide?  If separating them is
> > important on those grounds, how about something like pg_db or
> > pg_db_command?
> > 
> It doesn't make sense because pg_ctl is server-side and pg_command would
> be client-side.


> >> pg_oid2name: I don't have a strong opinion that it fits in pg_command;
> > 
> > I vaguely knew that this existed, but I can't recall having heard of
> > anybody actually using it.  I suppose it's under pg_ctl if the split
> > above between instance-wide and db-specific holds.
> > 
> I don't use it for a long time. It also a client-side binary then better
> place for it is pg_command. BTW, is anybody using it? If so, we could
> add this functionality to psql and remove it.

Sure.  For server versions 10 or better, it could be a call to a new
server-side function.

David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to