Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Christoph Berg <christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?
Date: 2014-06-20 14:58:12
Message-ID: CAMkU=1z3Edq+CNRo4F=jBEzXNMidSskdm=cPcAZnOgdY2sivXw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Christoph Berg
<christoph(dot)berg(at)credativ(dot)de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that we have vacuumdb --all --analyze-in-stages in 9.4, wouldn't
> it make sense to get rid of the analyze_new_cluster.sh file which
> pg_upgrade writes? The net content is a single line which could as
> well be printed by pg_upgrade itself. Instead of an lengthy
> explanation how to invoke that manually, there should be a short note
> and a pointer to some manual section. I think the chances of people
> reading that would even be increased.

That one line was longer in the past, it could become longer again in
the future. I don't think we should toggle the presentation back and
forth from version to version depending how long it happens to be.

> Similary, I don't really see the usefulness of delete_old_cluster.sh
> as a file, when "rm -rf" could just be presented on the console for
> the admin to execute by cut-and-paste.

I certainly would not want to run rm -rf commands copied off the
console window. A slip of the mouse (or the paste buffer) and
suddenly you are removing entirely the wrong level of the directory
tree.

But I wouldn't mind an option to suppress the creation of those files.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christoph Berg 2014-06-20 15:15:05 Re: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2014-06-20 14:25:35 Re: replication commands and log_statements