Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta
От | Thom Brown |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta |
Дата | |
Msg-id | s2tbddc86151005061310g51195f44w2904f5d78df6a59@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_migrator to /contrib in a later 9.0 beta
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 6 May 2010 20:55, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:OK, seems people like pg_upgrade, but do we call it "pgupgrade" or
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > > On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 20:24 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > >> I think it will be confusing if we change the name, so I vote to not
> > >> change the name.
> >
> > > Actually, I would vote yes to change the name.
> >
> > I lean that way too. If there were no history involved, we'd certainly
> > prefer pg_upgrade to pg_migrator.
>
> Yeah, that was my feeling too. People like "pg_upgrade", or something
> else? I will add some text like "pg_upgrade (formerly pg_migrator)" in
> the docs.
"pg_upgrade"? I don't see consistent naming in /contrib:pg_trgm/
pg_buffercache/
pg_freespacemap/
pg_standby/
pg_stat_statements/
pgbench/
pgcrypto/
pgrowlocks/
pgstattuple/
The original 7.2 name was "pg_upgrade":
http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/contrib/pg_upgrade/Attic/
--
You will call it pg_upgrade. I have spoken.
Thom
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: