| From: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? |
| Date: | 2005-10-07 09:44:47 |
| Message-ID: | 4346438F.6090102@pse-consulting.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> As against that, changing them back now might just confuse matters even
> more. And I tend to agree with Neil's judgment that the new definitions
> are cleaner in themselves.
When talking about cleanliness of the definition, a name like
"pg_stat_file" seems quite unfortunate since in the presence of many
pg_stat_* statistics functions it sounds like a function dealing with
statistics files. The pg_*_file names were actually not discussed
exhaustively, originally posted as pg_file_*.
Taking from this, a clean naming convention would require
pg_backend_cancel (and pg_file_stat), extending this beta2->beta3
changes even more but leaving backward compatibility if the int
pg_cancel_backend isn't replaced, but accompanied by a clean bool version.
As Dave already pointed out, pgAdmin isn't affected itself, since we
need some additional functions anyway to remain 8.0 compatibility.
Regards,
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Emil Briggs | 2005-10-07 12:50:05 | Some spinlock patch tests |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-10-07 09:36:27 | Re: Shell script to extract a table from a plain text dump |