Horton

Re: pg_validatebackup -> pg_verifybackup?

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: 2020-04-12T14:57:59Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 5:51 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> I like this idea so much that I already proposed it in the past[1], so +1.
>> 
>> [1] https://postgr.es/m/20160826202911.GA320593@alvherre.pgsql

> Hey, look at that. I think I had some vague recollection of a prior
> proposal, but I couldn't remember exactly who or exactly what had been
> proposed. I do think that pg_ctl is too long a prefix, though. People
> can get used to typing 'pg createdb' instead of 'createdb' but 'pg_ctl
> createdb' seems like too much. At least, it would very very quickly
> cause me to install aliases.

Yeah, I'd be happier with "pg" than "pg_ctl" as well.  But it's so
short that I wonder if some other software has already adopted it.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Rename pg_validatebackup to pg_verifybackup some more.

  2. Rename pg_validatebackup to pg_verifybackup.