Re: Rename Function: pg_postmaster_start_time

> On 6 Nov 2024, at 20:28, Maiquel Grassi <grassi(at)hotmail(dot)com(dot)br> wrote:
>
> >This function has this name since 600da67fbe5e back from 2008.
> >Changing that 16 years later will break things.
>
> Certainly, there are more considerations to take into account
> than I initially realized. One possibility would be to create an
> alias (or synonym) for the function "pg_postmaster_start_time",
> naming it "pg_postgres_start_time". This way, the name change
> could occur gradually and strategically over the coming years,
> without immediate impact. I believe this approach could be
> viable to facilitate a future transition without abrupt breaks. Maiquel

I can agree that pg_postmaster_ has the potential to be confusing to users, but
I agree that if we are to do anything it should be alias while maintaining the
old name for compatibility.

Looking at similar functions it's clear they don't use the pg_postgres_ prefix,
like for example pg_conf_load_time. Should this if so be pg_start_time?

--
Daniel Gustafsson