Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions
Дата
Msg-id 200407202137.41942.peter_e@gmx.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions  (Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>)
Список pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> For logs I think pgsql_ is best because that filename is already
> going to be long, and I don't usually like dashes in file names.
> They look too much like arguments, but tarballs use them and it looks
> OK there, I guess.

I wasn't talking about what looks best, I was talking about current
practice for log files.  From that you might be able to extrapolate
what other people have previously found to look best.

In any case, we're not using DOS and 12 inch monitors any more.  File
names can be as long as we want.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/


В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pg_dump --clean w/ <= 7.2 server
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: pg_config