Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
>> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> There have been complaints that pg_receivexlog's name is not consistent
>>> with pg_recvlogical, and I seem to recall there were some votes for
>>> renaming pg_receivexlog to match. We could make it "pg_recvwal" now.
>
>> ... I would prefer not to go there.
>
> I agree. "pg_recvlogical" was a badly chosen name; let's not double
> down on the error.
>
> What I think might be worth considering is inserting underscores,
> eg "pg_receive_wal", anywhere that we are running the abbreviation
> directly against another word. We won't get another chance.

Yeah, I thought about that, too, but it doesn't really seem worth it.
If we had pg_receive_wal and pg_receive_logical, they'd be nicely
consistent with each other, but inconsistent with practically every
other utility we have: pg_basebackup, pg_archivecleanup,
pg_controldata, etc. I'm not prepared to endorse renaming all of that
stuff just to add underscores, and frankly I don't think the style
pg_foobarbaz is really a problem. It's a lot easier to remember "the
only underscore is after the initial pg" than it is to remember
exactly how each word was abbreviated in each context.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company