On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:38:03PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 23:26 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:24:08PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > Why was this change made? > > > > I asked Andrew and he had no idea why a 'set -x' would be in the script. > > I ran the script and saw the commands being echoed. Was that > > intentional? > > yes > > > If so, I can add it back, > > please > > > but it would be good to add a > > comment as to why it was being used, because Andrew and I had no idea, > > and thought it was a mistake. > > Well, it is so you can see what's being run in case you see failures or > odd output. It's usually fairly self-evident what set -x does, but feel > free to comment it.
OK, added, with a comment. When the script ends, the set -x is a little verbose for my liking. It makes it look like something is wrong --- perhaps we should set +x there. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers