| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>, Vladimir Rusinov <vrusinov(at)google(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Cynthia Shang <cynthia(dot)shang(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal |
| Date: | 2017-01-12 18:46:34 |
| Message-ID: | 11558.1484246794@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I just don't buy this argument, at all. These functions names are
> certainly not the only things we're changing with PG10 and serious
> monitoring/backup/administration tools are almost certainly going to
> have quite a bit to adjust to with the new release, and that isn't news
> to anyone who works with PG.
Hmm --- we've been conducting this argument in a vacuum, but you're right,
we should consider what else is changing in v10. If you can point to
already-committed changes that mean that code using these functions will
almost certainly need changes anyway for v10, then that would greatly
weaken the argument for providing aliases.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-01-12 18:50:18 | Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-01-12 18:43:15 | Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal |