BUG #15796: [not a bug actually] vacuumlo - its name is confusing

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

BUG #15796: [not a bug actually] vacuumlo - its name is confusing

PG Doc comments form
The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      15796
Logged by:          Timur Birsh
Email address:      [hidden email]
PostgreSQL version: 11.2
Operating system:   CentOS 7
Description:        

Hello,

I think vacuumlo's name is confusing, especially for newbies. As we know,
vacuumlo's purpose is to remove orphaned large objects, not to vacuum
them.
Is it possible to rename this utility? I am sorry, if it is already
discussed.

Thanks,
Timur

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUG #15796: [not a bug actually] vacuumlo - its name is confusing

Michael Paquier-2
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:52:33AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> I think vacuumlo's name is confusing, especially for newbies. As we know,
> vacuumlo's purpose is to remove orphaned large objects, not to vacuum
> them.
> Is it possible to rename this utility? I am sorry, if it is already
> discussed.

The tool is old enough to vote (94bb87f from 1999), and holds this
name since its birth.  So a renaming may be more annoying than
anything else I am afraid.
--
Michael

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUG #15796: [not a bug actually] vacuumlo - its name is confusing

Tom Lane-2
Michael Paquier <[hidden email]> writes:
> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:52:33AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
>> I think vacuumlo's name is confusing, especially for newbies. As we know,
>> vacuumlo's purpose is to remove orphaned large objects, not to vacuum
>> them.
>> Is it possible to rename this utility? I am sorry, if it is already
>> discussed.

> The tool is old enough to vote (94bb87f from 1999), and holds this
> name since its birth.  So a renaming may be more annoying than
> anything else I am afraid.

Yeah, the backwards-compatibility hit seems rather disproportionate
to the value of a change.

Also, I'm not really convinced that a name change would be much of
an improvement.  Zapping unreferenced large objects is sort of like
what VACUUM does, if you aren't too picky about details ...

                        regards, tom lane