Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Is pg_xact actually better than pg_clog?
>
> Yes, because it doesn't contain the three letters "log".

I figured somebody was going to say that.

> We have the two precedents "pg_subtrans" and "pg_multixact", so
> unless we want to get into renaming those too, I think "pg_trans"
> and "pg_xact" are really the only options worth considering.
>
> Personally I'd go for "pg_trans", but it's only a weak preference.

Heaven forfend we actually use enough characters to make it self-documenting.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company