On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 04:33:47PM -0300, Euler Taveira wrote: > On 26-08-2016 14:03, David Fetter wrote: > > Would these make sense as pg_ctl options, or are you separating them > > out because they're not instance-wide? If separating them is > > important on those grounds, how about something like pg_db or > > pg_db_command? > > > It doesn't make sense because pg_ctl is server-side and pg_command would > be client-side.
Perfect! > >> pg_oid2name: I don't have a strong opinion that it fits in pg_command; > > > > I vaguely knew that this existed, but I can't recall having heard of > > anybody actually using it. I suppose it's under pg_ctl if the split > > above between instance-wide and db-specific holds. > > > I don't use it for a long time. It also a client-side binary then better > place for it is pg_command. BTW, is anybody using it? If so, we could > add this functionality to psql and remove it. Sure. For server versions 10 or better, it could be a call to a new server-side function. Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
