Greg Smith píše v ne 15. 11. 2009 v 22:16 -0500: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Simon Riggs <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > If we did add an extra option then the option would be "initdb" not > > > "init". It would take us all years to remove all evidence of the phrase > > > "initdb" from the mailing lists and our minds. > > > > > > > "init" is already embedded in various packagers' initscripts. And > > I thought the entire point of this proposal was that we could expunge > > knowledge of initdb from users' minds. > Exactly. I think the best transition design would be to make "initdb" > and "init" both work. "initdb" sounds me now better then "init", but to have both is technically not problem. But question is if it is less confusing than have only one of them. Just a note that we already have WAL/XLOG or postgres/postmaster/frontend/backend. Zdenek -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
