Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>
> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
> vacuumdb reindexdb

I just want to say I dislike this idea.

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

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>
>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>
> I just want to say I dislike this idea.

This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.


/D

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

On Jul 6, 2007, at 5:53 , Dave Page wrote:

> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>
>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>>
>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>
> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.

While the change might be awkward, the names of these binaries really
should be namespaced in some way. The current just too generic to be
throwing into a bin/ directory in my opinion.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>
> On Jul 6, 2007, at 5:53 , Dave Page wrote:
>
>> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>>
>>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>>>
>>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>>
>> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
>> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
>> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.
>
> While the change might be awkward, the names of these binaries really
> should be namespaced in some way. The current just too generic to be
> throwing into a bin/ directory in my opinion.

Why should they be name spaced? I see zero reason why that should be the
case...

apache_httpd?
gnu_ls?

The only obvious name spaced applications out there are in the G/K world
of nome and de.

Joshua D. Drake


>
> Michael Glaesemann
> grzm seespotcode net
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>


--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>
> On Jul 6, 2007, at 5:53 , Dave Page wrote:
>
>> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>>
>>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>>>
>>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>>
>> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
>> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
>> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.
>
> While the change might be awkward, the names of these binaries really
> should be namespaced in some way. The current just too generic to be
> throwing into a bin/ directory in my opinion.

Of course I realize that I voted for the idea in the first place. I
voted for it for consistency more than anything but as I think about it,
it really is clunky and doesn't serve any real purpose.


Joshua D. Drake

>
> Michael Glaesemann
> grzm seespotcode net
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>


--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

On Jul 6, 2007, at 11:28 , Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Why should they be name spaced? I see zero reason why that should
> be the case...
>
> apache_httpd?
> gnu_ls?

Personally, I think that the Apache daemon *should* be named apached
or something along those lines.

Compare with postgres, pg_ctl, pg_dump, or pg_config. Albeit postgres
is not consistent, they're all easily identifiable with PostgreSQL.
In my opinion, postgres, pg_ctl, pg_ccmp, and pg_config are better
names than, say, dbmsd, dbms_ctl, db_dump, and db_config. Also, we
recently deprecated the use of postmaster (easily confused with mail
systems) in favor of postgres. Looking at the binaries that are
installed for 8.2:

clusterdb
createdb
createlang
createuser
dropdb
droplang
dropuser
ecpg
initdb
ipcclean
pg_config
pg_controldata
pg_ctl
pg_dump
pg_dumpall
pg_resetxlog
pg_restore
postgres
postmaster -> postgres
psql
reindexdb
vacuumdb

If these are all dumped into /usr/local/bin (as they sometimes are),
many of them are not readily identifiable with PostgreSQL. Shouldn't
they be? Compare with Subversion:
svn
svnadmin
svndumpfileter
svnlook
svnserver
svnsync
svnversion

I find these names much more consistent.

Michael Glaesemann
grzm seespotcode net




---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Dave Page wrote:
> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>
>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>
> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.

But these utilities are mostly using in scripts -> one type, multi use.
I think, most users prefer psql for interactive typing.


Zdenek

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 6, 2007, at 5:53 , Dave Page wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, July 6, 2007 8:51 am, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>> Am Mittwoch, 4. Juli 2007 17:04 schrieb Zdenek Kotala:
>>>>> I attach complete patch which renames following binaries
>>>>>
>>>>> createdb createlang createuser dropdb droplang dropuser clusterdb
>>>>> vacuumdb reindexdb
>>>>
>>>> I just want to say I dislike this idea.
>>>
>>> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
>>> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
>>> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.
>>
>> While the change might be awkward, the names of these binaries really
>> should be namespaced in some way. The current just too generic to be
>> throwing into a bin/ directory in my opinion.
>
> Of course I realize that I voted for the idea in the first place. I
> voted for it for consistency more than anything but as I think about it,
> it really is clunky and doesn't serve any real purpose.
>

There is group of people who has different opinion. The main reasons for
this patch are 1) names could collide with system tools 2) it is
confusing for lot of users - typically for newbies and me :-) 3) it is
not consistent with naming convention.

I started to use postgres since version 6.5 and these names of script
utilities are still confusing for me.

By the way my original idea was create new command "pg_cmd", which
integrates all in one include missing commands(e.g. createtablespace).


Zdenek

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> This is almost as bad as Magnus agreeing with JD (!), but I agree with
>> Peter :-). After years of typing the current names, changing them does
>> seem somewhat annoying. Worse yet, pg_* is just awkward to type.

> But these utilities are mostly using in scripts -> one type, multi use.

According to whom? The ones that are really at issue I think are
createuser/createlang/dropuser/droplang, and those seem mainly intended
for interactive use. In a script you might as well use psql -c.

The ones that have "db" in the name do not seem to me to need renaming.
While maybe not obviously connected to Postgres, the chance of a
collision with some other project is low.

One that I'd personally vote to remove completely is "ipcclean".
It's always been a crude, incomplete hack anyway, and the reason
no one has bothered to improve it is that there is next to no use
for it anymore.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes:
> There is group of people who has different opinion. The main reasons for
> this patch are 1) names could collide with system tools

That argument is purely theoretical, though, since no one has complained
to us of an *actual* collision. With these utilities having been around
with their current names for more than ten years, I think we've
established sufficient squatter's rights on the names ;-). No doubt
we'd do it differently if starting in a green field, but we're not
starting in a green field. There's enough usage precedent now that I
doubt we can ever remove the existing names, which leaves me wondering
what is the point.

> By the way my original idea was create new command "pg_cmd", which
> integrates all in one include missing commands(e.g. createtablespace).

There doesn't seem to be anyone but you who feels any attraction to that
concept. These utilities have a wide enough difference in behavior and
intended usage that ISTM force-fitting them into a single binary would
just increase confusion and difficulty of use.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq