Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwbW-DKVcpuDtGkYq9NS-LD_atP4O9wxzRd7Eewt4xx5fw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I'm mostly with Stephen on this. As the names stand, they encourage
> people to go look at the documentation,
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/storage- file-layout.html
> which will provide more information than you'd ever get out of any
> reasonable directory name.
Well, we could change them all to pg_a, pg_b, pg_c, pg_d, ... which
would encourage that even more strongly. But I don't think that
proposal can be taken seriously. Giving things meaningful names is a
good practice in almost every case.
Those don't have the virtue of being at least somewhat
m
nemonic like pg_xact.
I'll toss my lot in with Steven's and Tom's on this.
I have no problem continuing keeping with historical precedent and allowing mnemonic abbreviations in our directory and file names at this point.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: