Re: rename pg_log_standby_snapshot

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: rename pg_log_standby_snapshot
Date: 2025-04-06 06:33:39
Message-ID: Z_IgQ4dRaSLZF966@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 10:32:40PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> I think this would all be a nice argument to have when introducing a new
> function. But I don't think it's a wart sufficiently big to justify breaking
> compatibility.

Yeah, I would side as well with the compatibility argument on this
one.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2025-04-06 06:53:14 Re: Back-patch of: avoid multiple hard links to same WAL file after a crash
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2025-04-06 05:01:34 Re: Parallel heap vacuum