Re: Prevent printing "next step instructions" in initdb and pg_upgrade

On 02.11.2020 16:23, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:35:25AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>>>> On 2020-10-06 12:26, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>>>> I went with the name --no-instructions to have the same name for both
>>>>>> initdb and pg_upgrade. The downside is that "no-instructions" also
>>>>>> causes the scripts not to be written in pg_upgrade, which arguably is a
>>>>>> different thing. We could go with "--no-instructions" and
>>>>>> "--no-scripts", but that would leave the parameters different. I also
>>>>>> considered "--no-next-step", but that one didn't quite have the right
>>>>>> ring to me. I'm happy for other suggestions on the parameter names.
>>>>> What scripts are left after we remove the analyze script, as discussed in a
>>>>> different thread?
>>>> There is still delete_old_cluster.sh.
>>>> I wonder if we should just not do it and just say "you should delete
>>>> the old cluster". Then we can leave it up to platform integrations to
>>>> enhance that, based on their platform knowledge (such as for example
>>>> knowing if the platform runs systemd or not). That would leave us with
>>>> both pg_upgrade and initdb printing instructions, and not scripts, and
>>>> solve that part of the issue.
>>>>
Do we only care about .sh scripts? There are also reindex_hash.sql and 
pg_largeobject.sqlin src/bin/pg_upgrade/version.c with instructions.
How should we handle them?

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company