| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog |
| Date: | 2016-10-21 01:03:22 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobOKwq4GFytN=SAyCF7CvNF-FVC2-E7Hxyqx-mn=zE_Zg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)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.
> Having said that, I still don't like "pg_logical", but I suppose
> renaming it would have more downsides than upsides.
Remind me what your beef is?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vinayak | 2016-10-21 01:06:25 | Typo in pgstat.c |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-21 01:01:02 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |