On Wednesday 26 March 2008 12:17, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> > Tom Lane napsal(a):
> >> Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
> >>> output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
> >
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> Thanks for correction. I don't have yet PG8.3 on my production server and
> I was convinced with good autovacuum marketing that is "ultimate
> solution". :-)
It is not perfect yet. It's improving -- keep in mind it's rather new.
However, I doubt "vacuumdb -a" is the thi
Marc G. Fournier napsal(a):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Wednesday, March 26, 2008 12:58:41 +0100 Zdeněk Kotala
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Minimal me :-) and Solaris Architect committee have complain. Question is
also how many users really use these commands. For ex
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:28:49 -0300
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Huh? I run a vacuumdb once a week on all my databases, even with
> autovacuum turned on
Yeah I have to agree. Autovacuum only solves the common data issues.
There are still many, many issues that it can't solve. A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Wednesday, March 26, 2008 12:58:41 +0100 Zdeněk Kotala
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Minimal me :-) and Solaris Architect committee have complain. Question is
> also how many users really use these commands. For example vacuumdb is not
> too
Andrew Dunstan napsal(a):
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
Tom Lane napsal(a):
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
Now we're into change for the sake of change?
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
Tom Lane napsal(a):
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
Now we're into change for the sake of change? Those programs don't
have a
Tom Lane napsal(a):
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
There's an awful lot of names here that don't have any obvious
connection to Postgres ...
Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
Now w
Zdenek Kotala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> There's an awful lot of names here that don't have any obvious
>> connection to Postgres ...
> Why we have pg_dump and pg_dumpall? Or I think pg_resetxlog has same
> output like pg_controldata. I think we can merge these commands.
Now we're into change
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> Tom Lane napsal(a):
> > Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Another option then might be to simply deprecate their use, and
> >> eventually get rid of them, instead of renaming them?
> >
> > I'd like to get rid of ipcclean immediately; it hasn't had any usefulne
Tom Lane napsal(a):
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Another option then might be to simply deprecate their use, and
eventually get rid of them, instead of renaming them?
I'd like to get rid of ipcclean immediately; it hasn't had any usefulness
in years.
+1
The issue is larger t
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Another option then might be to simply deprecate their use, and
> eventually get rid of them, instead of renaming them?
I'd like to get rid of ipcclean immediately; it hasn't had any usefulness
in years.
The issue is larger than the proposed patch add
Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
Andrew Dunstan napsal(a):
Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
Question is also how many users really use these commands. For
example vacuumdb is not too important now when we have autovacuum.
This is not true. Plenty of apps will quite reasonably choose to
follow large batch update
Andrew Dunstan napsal(a):
Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
Question is also how many users really use these commands. For example
vacuumdb is not too important now when we have autovacuum.
This is not true. Plenty of apps will quite reasonably choose to follow
large batch updates by a single vacuumdb r
Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
Question is also how many users really use these commands. For example
vacuumdb is not too important now when we have autovacuum.
This is not true. Plenty of apps will quite reasonably choose to follow
large batch updates by a single vacuumdb rather than using autovacuum
Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 13:21 +0100, Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Are we really prepared to break everyone's scripts for this?
I wonder how many people actually use those commands :-) I know I al
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 13:21 +0100, Zdeněk Kotala wrote:
> Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
> > On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Are we really prepared to break everyone's scripts for this?
> >
> > I wonder how many people actually use those commands :-) I know I always
>
Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Are we really prepared to break everyone's scripts for this?
I wonder how many people actually use those commands :-) I know I always
use psql with a commandline parameter, and the majority of other peoples
scrip
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 21:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Where are we on this? Tom thinks we don't want this. TODO has:
> > * Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/
Marc G. Fournier napsal(a):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Tuesday, March 25, 2008 22:51:53 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Uh, I think it is hard to make a case that 'createuser' is an
appropriate name for a Postgres utility. On the other hand, we hav
Bruce Momjian napsal(a):
Where are we on this? Tom thinks we don't want this. TODO has:
I plan to send survey on general list about it today.
Zdenek
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Tuesday, March 25, 2008 22:51:53 -0400 Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Uh, I think it is hard to make a case that 'createuser' is an
> appropriate name for a Postgres utility. On the other hand, we haven't
> had many complaints a
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Where are we on this? Tom thinks we don't want this. TODO has:
> > * Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00025.php
>
> It wasn't just me;
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Where are we on this? Tom thinks we don't want this. TODO has:
> * Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00025.php
It wasn't just me; quite a few people were dub
Where are we on this? Tom thinks we don't want this. TODO has:
* Prefix command-line utilities like createuser with 'pg_'
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-06/msg00025.php
See for reference:
http://momjian.us/mhonarc/patches/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
One idea is
25 matches
Mail list logo
