Re: Unfortunate choice of short switch name in pgbench
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unfortunate choice of short switch name in pgbench |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2618.1393522768@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unfortunate choice of short switch name in pgbench (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: Unfortunate choice of short switch name in pgbench
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes: >> Yeah, but they don't make -P take an integer argument. It's that >> little frammish that makes this problem significant. > I do not see a strong case to make options with arguments case insensitive > as a general rule. If this is done for -p/-P, why not -t/-T? I have not proposed fooling with -t/-T; people are used to that one, and it's a core part of what pgbench does, so it's reasonable to expect that people are familiar with it. It helps also that -t and -T do somewhat related things, ie constrain the length of the test --- so even if you pick the wrong one, you still get behavior that's somewhat sane. > If you really fell you must remove -P, please replace it by another > one-letter, I use this option nearly everytime a run pgbench. Meh. If I thought -P would be that popular, I'd expect people to get used to the issue. I don't believe it though. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: