Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal
От | David Steele |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2d725bb8-e42e-8592-27f6-831e1c32975f@pgmasters.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/9/17 2:14 PM, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us > <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>>wrote: > > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com <mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com>> > writes: > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net <mailto:magnus@hagander.net>> wrote: > >>> Here is what I have, 6 votes clearly stated: > >>> 1. Rename nothing: Daniel, > >>> 2. Rename directory only: Andres > >>> 3. Rename everything: Stephen, Vladimir, David S, Michael P (with > >>> aliases for functions, I could live without at this point...) > > > [ vote-counting ] > > > Therefore, I plan to go ahead and do #3. Somebody's probably going to > > jump in now with another opinion but I think this thread's gone on > > long enough. > > Agreed, let's just get it done. > > Although this doesn't really settle whether we ought to do 3a (with > backwards-compatibility function aliases in core) or 3b (without 'em). > Do people want to re-vote, understanding that those are the remaining > choices? -1 on aliases in core (so to be clear my vote is for 3b). > I wouldn't oppose: > > CREATE EXTENSION give_me_my_xlog_back; > > but my prior thoughts lead me toward not including such functions in the > bootstrap catalog. I'm not very excited about an extension, can we just provide a link to a script in the release notes, or simply note that wrappers can be created? -- -David david@pgmasters.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: