Re: logical changeset generation v6
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: logical changeset generation v6 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEw7BBK13FnoEbJQnVEXGZBH2h08V1rj5AROYBU27-TN_A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: logical changeset generation v6 (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: logical changeset generation v6
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:+1
> I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have:
> * pg_receivexlog
> * pg_recvlogical
> binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once "pg_recv" and
> once "pg_receive"?
Digging up a really old thread since I just got annoyed by the inconsistent naming the first time myself :)
I can't find that this discussion actually came to a proper consensus, but I may be missing something. Did we go with pg_recvlogical just because we couldn't decide on a better name, or did we intentionally decide it was the best?
I definitely think pg_receivelogical would be a better name, for consistency (because it's way too late to rename pg_receivexlog of course - once released that can't really chance. Which is why *if* we want to change the name of pg_recvxlog we have a few more days to make a decision..)
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: