Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system
От | Gavin Flower |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1f6d84a6-505a-fa4a-f46b-64742511a55c@archidevsys.co.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL pollutes the file system (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28/03/2019 03:41, Tom Lane wrote: > Andreas Karlsson <andreas@proxel.se> writes: >> On 3/27/19 3:26 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>> That is true, of course. But are there actual examples of such conflicts >>> in practice? I mean, are there tools/packages that provide commands with >>> a conflicting name? I'm not aware of any, and as was pointed before, we'd >>> have ~20 years of history on any new ones. >> That is a fair argument. Since we squatted those names back in the >> mid-90s I think the risk of collision is low. > Right. I think there is a fair argument to be made for user confusion > (not actual conflict) with respect to createuser and dropuser. The > argument for renaming any of the other tools is much weaker, IMO. > > regards, tom lane > > I think the consistency of having all PostgreSQL commands start with 'pg_' would make them both easier to find and to learn. Although I think we should keep the psql command name, in addition to the pg_sql variant - the latter needed for consistency. Cheers, Gavin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: