Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
On Tuesday 20 April 2004 16:54, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
g a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I
think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken
Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't
go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to
use a better name.
initcatalog?
initpgstore ... we can play the name game if people are serious :-)
ooh... we havent done this is a while hows about
initpgdata?
dovetails nicely with PGDATA... at least until that gets deprecated ;-)
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: With initdb written now in C, we don't need a pg_encoding binary anymore. By the way, what change the name of initdb to pg_initdb. The current name is really too common (like some others things in pgsql/src/bin) Karel -- Karel Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
Karel Zak wrote: On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: With initdb written now in C, we don't need a pg_encoding binary anymore. By the way, what change the name of initdb to pg_initdb. The current name is really too common (like some others things in pgsql/src/bin) Uh, that would be pretty major. No one has complained about it in the past. I think createuser is much worse. :-) -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 08:59:20AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Karel Zak wrote: On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: With initdb written now in C, we don't need a pg_encoding binary anymore. By the way, what change the name of initdb to pg_initdb. The current name is really too common (like some others things in pgsql/src/bin) Uh, that would be pretty major. No one has complained about it in the past. I think createuser is much worse. :-) Sure. Maybe is needful wait for some other project like PostgreSQL that will use same clever names... But maybe we will never see a problem, because the others are less ignorant... Karel -- Karel Zak [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
Bruce Momjian wrote: Karel Zak wrote: On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:41:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: With initdb written now in C, we don't need a pg_encoding binary anymore. By the way, what change the name of initdb to pg_initdb. The current name is really too common (like some others things in pgsql/src/bin) Uh, that would be pretty major. No one has complained about it in the past. I think createuser is much worse. :-) Agreed. Actually, the big problem with the name initdb is that the name is misleading, and newbies often get confused by it. You are preparing a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a better name. cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
Andrew Dunstan wrote: past. I think createuser is much worse. :-) Agreed. Actually, the big problem with the name initdb is that the name is misleading, and newbies often get confused by it. You are preparing a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a better name. Yea, initcluster would have been better, but cluster confuses with CLUSTER, just like database schema confuses with CREATE SCHEMA. -- Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup.| Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
Joshua D. Drake wrote: g a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a better name. initcatalog? initpgstore ... we can play the name game if people are serious :-) cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
g a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a better name. initcatalog? cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.commandprompt.com PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [HACKERS] pg_encoding not needed anymore
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: past. I think createuser is much worse. :-) Agreed. Actually, the big problem with the name initdb is that the name is misleading, and newbies often get confused by it. You are preparing a data store for many databases, not a single database. But I think it is far too sanctified by history to change now, just as Ken Thompson now wishes he had put an 'e' on the end of 'creat' but can't go back and fix it. Maybe we should think about a symlink/hardlink to use a better name. Yea, initcluster would have been better, but cluster confuses with CLUSTER, just like database schema confuses with CREATE SCHEMA. Maybe initpg or pg_init or something like that? ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send unregister YourEmailAddressHere to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
