On 05-05-2015 16:36, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> 1. I like copying and pasting the "postgres" line during development.
> That's not a reason to keep it, necessarily.
>
I prefer pg_ctl because of symmetry (start, stop, restart, reload and
even init).
> 2. If you're saying, most people shouldn't run postgres directly, then
> most people also shouldn't run initdb directly. This message will
> mainly be seen either by developers or testers or tutorial users or
> do-it-yourselfers. In which case knowing the functionality of the
> postgres program is valid.
>
I'm not saying to discourage postgres binary use. It has its merit and
utility. However, the information after initdb is for general users and
not developers/testers (because the latter know how to start the
service) -- that's my impression.
We have an utility that concentrate all of the necessary modes (even
init) to operate postgres service. Why not advocate it for general
users? pg_ctl sounds more natural for postgres administration. How do
you explain that you have to start the service with 'postgres' but stop
it with 'pg_ctl' ou even 'kill'?
> 3. It's not clear that pg_ctl is necessarily the best way to start the
> server. With things like systemd, launchd, supervisord that like to
> manage the daemons directly, using postgres directly might be the
> preferable choice.
>
Agree. However, I'm saying that _general users_ (those that don't use OS
init interface) tend to prefer 'pg_ctl' to 'postgres'.
-- Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento,
Suporte24x7 e Treinamento