> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I guess we won't need two separate files global.bki and template1.bki
> > anymore. That would simplify some things, but maybe it's still a
> > stilistic thing.
>
> It's probably not absolutely necessary to have two, but why change it?
One less
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I guess we won't need two separate files global.bki and template1.bki
> anymore. That would simplify some things, but maybe it's still a
> stilistic thing.
It's probably not absolutely necessary to have two, but why change it?
Tom Lane writes:
> Accordingly, I suggest that initdb -t should be flushed entirely.
I guess we won't need two separate files global.bki and template1.bki
anymore. That would simplify some things, but maybe it's still a
stilistic thing.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://
Tom Lane writes:
> It occurs to me that the only likely use for initdb -t is now served by
> DROP DATABASE template1;
> CREATE DATABASE template1 WITH TEMPLATE = template0;
> ie, we have a *real* way to reconstruct a virgin template1 rather than
> an initdb kluge.
I agree.
> Accordi
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any idea if this is fixed?
> Peter, comments?
>>
>> It doesn't destroy all databases anymore, although I can't make any
>> statements about what it actually does do. I suppose it's still broken.
Peter did put in a hack to make sure it wouldn't do "rm
Any idea if this is fixed?
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > Peter, comments?
>
> It doesn't destroy all databases anymore, although I can't make any
> statements about what it actually does do. I suppose it's still broken.
>
> > > Richard Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > It seems that
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Peter, comments?
It doesn't destroy all databases anymore, although I can't make any
statements about what it actually does do. I suppose it's still broken.
> > Richard Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > It seems that initdb starts a single-user backend but gives i
Peter, comments?
> Richard Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It seems that initdb starts a single-user backend but gives it the "-x"
> > option, which makes it call BootStrapXLOG, which fails because it
> > expects to be called only on absolutely first-time system startup (?).
> > initdb see
Richard Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems that initdb starts a single-user backend but gives it the "-x"
> option, which makes it call BootStrapXLOG, which fails because it
> expects to be called only on absolutely first-time system startup (?).
> initdb sees the failure and removes eve
No response to this one on -general, so here goes...
The documentation for initdb says that the "-t" (== "--template") option
recreates the template1 database but doesn't touch anything else. But it
seems that if it detects a failure it will abort and remove anything it
*might* have created:
--
10 matches
Mail list logo
