Обсуждение: pg_checksums --help synopsis is quite long

With the additional functionality, the --help synopsis of pg_checksums
has gotten quite long:

   pg_checksums enables, disables, or verifies data checksums in a
   PostgreSQL database cluster.

Can we try to shorten this a bit?  Maybe

   pg_checksums manages data checksums in a PostgreSQL database cluster.

Other ideas?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Hello Peter,

> With the additional functionality, the --help synopsis of pg_checksums
> has gotten quite long:
>
>   pg_checksums enables, disables, or verifies data checksums in a
>   PostgreSQL database cluster.
>
> Can we try to shorten this a bit?  Maybe
>
>   pg_checksums manages data checksums in a PostgreSQL database cluster.
>
> Other ideas?

My 0.02 €:

   pg_checksums triggers or verifies checksums in a Postgres cluster.

I like the somehow detailed functionality list, if space allows, so I 
tried to compressed the other parts.

Not sure that there could be a checksum on anything else but data.

I have decided that PostgreSQL is a mouthful, thus I'm rather using 
"Postgres".

-- 
Fabien.

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:59:25AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I think trigger is a bad word to use there, but I was already thinking to
> suggest something like "pg_checksums manages or verifies checksums in a
> PostgreSQL cluster", if that doesn't end up being too long?

Doesn't "manage" somewhat include "verify?  I don't find "trigger"
much helpful.

> Yeah, while we call them "data checksums" in most places, dropping the word
> data seems acceptable if we need to in order to get it short enough.

It would like to keep "data checksums" in the output, and by using the
suggestion of Peter upthread (aka only "manages"), the output gets
down:
$ pg_checksums --help | head -n1
pg_checksums manages data checksums in a PostgreSQL database cluster.
$ pg_checksums --help | head -n1 | wc -c
70

>> I have decided that PostgreSQL is a mouthful, thus I'm rather using
>> "Postgres".
>
> Changing that in one tool and not everything would of course be really
> silly. And if you want to bring up the renaming again, please do so on
> pgsql-advocacy as a separate topic :)

Indeed.  The official spelling is still "PostgreSQL".
--
Michael

Bonjour Michaël,

> It would like to keep "data checksums" in the output,

You can do as you feel.

>>> I have decided that PostgreSQL is a mouthful, thus I'm rather using
>>> "Postgres".
>>
>> Changing that in one tool and not everything would of course be really 
>> silly. And if you want to bring up the renaming again, please do so on 
>> pgsql-advocacy as a separate topic :)
>
> Indeed.  The official spelling is still "PostgreSQL".

Yep. I'm using "Postgres" wherever & whenever I can as a personal choice, 
but I'm not planning to campaign about it. Now, it is good to know that 
"postgres.org" seems owned by the project.

-- 
Fabien.