From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_xlog -> pg_xjournal? |
Date: | 2015-06-02 03:57:58 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTFUDtGV1F=dtXA_dgfC9H8FH+HGtaqVT7MjZb68HbwrA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 06/01/2015 04:22 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Also ... if we were to rename it, it should be "pg_wal" or "pg_xact".
>>> Please let's not add yet another term for the WAL.
>>
>> +1 for pg_wal if it has to be renamed.
>>
>> If pg_clog also has to be renamed, how about using your other
>> suggestion "pg_xact" for that? It fits alongside pg_multixact.
>
> Yes, or pg_commit would work too (it's the "commit log").
>
> However, choosing a new name is the easy part.
If we are talking about deletion of paths named as *log* here...
pg_commit sounds like a recipe for a user thinking something like
that: I have a long-running transaction and it *won't* commit, so
deleting pg_commit will enforce its rollback. Then let's delete it.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Nolan | 2015-06-02 04:35:23 | Re: pg_xlog -> pg_xjournal? |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-06-02 03:53:24 | Re: about lob(idea) |