Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding
Date: 2007-01-26 00:58:39
Message-ID: 45B9523F.9080101@Yahoo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 1/25/2007 7:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> 	1	fires always
> 	0	fires never
> 	N	fires in "Normal" mode
> 	R	fires in "Replica" mode
> 	other letters available for other future mode values?
> 
> If you consistently think of "origin" and "replica" modes then the
> original proposal is better (using both 0 and O would be Real Bad),
> but your use of "normal" and "replica" in the followup makes me wonder
> which terminology is more common.

Yeah, I tried for a long time to stay away from terms like master and 
slave ... but in the end people don't understand you if you talk about 
origin and subscriber or replica. That's how this inconsistent 
terminology slipped into my vocabulary.

I personally don't care about the particular values. I could live with 
A, B, C, D. If people find 1, 0, N, R more explanatory, fine.


Jan

-- 
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Richard TroyDate: 2007-01-26 01:42:32
Subject: Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp
Previous:From: Jan WieckDate: 2007-01-26 00:49:46
Subject: Re: Proposal: Commit timestamp

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group