Re: Why does pg_checksums -r not have a long option?
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
From: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-05-27T14:22:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bonjour Michael, > + <varlistentry> > + <term><option>-f <replaceable>filenode</replaceable></option></term> > + <term><option>--filenode=<replaceable>filenode</replaceable></option></term> > + <listitem> > + <para> > + Only validate checksums in the relation with specified relation file node. > + </para> > Two nits. I would just have been careful about the number of > characters in the line within the <para> markup. And we use > extensively "filenode" in the docs. Ok. > + [ 'pg_checksums', '--enable', '-filenode', '1234', '-D', $pgdata ], > This fails, but not for the reason it is written for. Indeed. command_fails() is a little too simplistic, it should really check that the error message is there. > It looks strange to not order --filenode alphabetically in --help. Forgot, it stayed at the r position for no good reason. > With all these issues cleaned up, I got the attached. Does that look > fine? (I ran pgperltidy and pgindent on top of it.) Works for me. Doc build is ok as well. -- Fabien.
Commits
-
Rework options of pg_checksums options for filenode handling
- fc115d0f9fc6 12.0 landed