On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 1:49 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 08:41:32AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > >> Can someone describe a scenario where this (name of the binary not > >> clearly indicating it's related postgres) causes issues in practice? On > >> my system, there are ~1400 binaries in /usr/bin, and for the vast > >> majority of them it's rather unclear where do they come from. > > Naming conflict because our binary names are too generic? createdb > could for example be applied to any database, and not only Postgres. > (I have 1600 entries in /usr/bin on a Debian installation.) > I generally agree with Tom that there is sufficient precedence here that we don't need to worry about these conflicts per se. However I would add two points where we might want to think: 1. createuser/dropuser are things that I don't consider good ways of creating users anyway. I think we should just consider removing these binaries. The SQL queries are better, more functional, and can be rolled back as a part of a larger transaction. 2. initdb is not so much of a pressing issue but I think despite the longer string, pg_ctl -D mydatadir init [options] would be clearer from a new user perspective and pose less cognitive load. > > >> > >> But it's not really an issue, because we have tools to do that > >> > >> 1) man > >> > >> 2) -h/--help > >> > >> 3) rpm -qf $file (and similarly for other packagers) > >> > >> 4) set --prefix to install binaries so separate directory (which some > >> distros already do anyway) > >> > >> So to me this seems like a fairly invasive change (potentially breaking > >> quite a few scripts/tools) just to address a minor inconvenience. > > > > +1. > > Yes, +1. > -- > Michael > -- Best Regards, Chris Travers Head of Database Tel: +49 162 9037 210 | Skype: einhverfr | www.adjust.com Saarbrücker Straße 37a, 10405 Berlin
