Re: slotname vs slot_name
| От | Fujii Masao |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: slotname vs slot_name |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAHGQGwGEntM0Z7ocsn2ztDADuuU-PDZHFTvt=STbr-newB70RA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | slotname vs slot_name (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: slotname vs slot_name
Re: slotname vs slot_name Re: slotname vs slot_name |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Due to the opened window of the pg_control/catalog version bump a chance > has opened to fix a inconsistency I've recently been pointed > towards: > Namely that replication slots are named 'slot_name' in one half of the > cases and 'slotname' in the other. That's in views, SRF columns, > function parameters and the primary_slotname recovery.conf parameter. > > My personal tendency would be to make it slot_name everywhere except the > primary_slotname recovery.conf parameter. There we already have > precedent for shortening names. > > Other opinions? I like using "slot_name" everywhere, i.e, even in recovery.conf. primary_slot_name seems not so long name. BTW, what about also renaming pg_llog directory? I'm afraid that a user can confuse pg_log with pg_llog. Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: