Re: [PATCHES] postmaster/postgres merge for testing

On 1/23/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Attached is a patch that merges postmaster and postgres into just a
> > postmaster command.
>
> I had some second thoughts about this, specifically about which
> direction do we really want to go in.  With this patch, it no longer
> really matters what the executable file is named, right?  We were both
> implicitly assuming that the name should end up being "postmaster",
> but I think there's a good case to be made that the right thing to do
> is to migrate in the direction of having just one executable named
> "postgres".  We've seen complaints before that having a daemon named
> "postmaster" confuses newbies into thinking it's got something to do
> with mail.  And it's already the case that the child processes all call
> themselves "postgres", which will become even more confusing if there is
> no longer any executable named "postgres".

+1 for 'postgres'.

--
marko