Re: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwZhcsxD=P+Eqb8RgU8DKUP+uzQ-NF9cqYtqM_uhum+-jw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation (vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, March 11, 2025, vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
Apart from the database, I believe the target file also needs to be
specified. Should we include this option also along with dbname:
+ <group choice="plain">
+ <group choice="req">
+ <arg choice="plain"><option>-d</option></arg>
+ <arg choice="plain"><option>--dbname</option></arg>
+ </group>
+ <replaceable>dbname</replaceable>
+ </group>
pg_recvlogical -U postgres --start -S test -d postgres
pg_recvlogical: error: no target file specified
To reinforce my suggestion to “do nothing” here with the synopsis; your “show mandatory” policy would extend to “—slot” as well as communicating that ((create OR start) XOR drop) must also be specified.
I am fine with this “show mandatory” policy in concept but doing it just here in lieu of an acceptable “no options” policy presently doesn’t make sense. There is debate, from me at least, whether such a command synopsis should include both short and long options in an alternate group or just short options, unless the option is a switch. You went with both here which I dislike.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: