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

Re: filenames in pg_basebackup

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgtranslation-translators <pgtranslation-tanslators(at)pgfoundry(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: filenames in pg_basebackup
Date: 2012-07-25 23:15:34
Message-ID: 6235.1343258134@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> One thing I'm not clear about is the "WAL file" vs "transaction log
> file" terminology.  We use both in various error messages.  Do we want
> to consistently use one?  It seems to me that we're using the very
> verbose "transaction log" phrase just to avoid exposing users to the
> "WAL" acronym, but that's probably a lost cause.  We also have the issue
> of calling those files "files" or "segments".  I understand that
> internally we don't want to confuse them, but I don't see that the
> distinction makes any sense to users.

Yeah, we did talk about that a bit when Heikki was working on the
64-bit-XLogPointer changes.  AFAIR, there was general consensus that
it'd be better to standardize on one terminology, but little agreement
on which wording to use :-(.  I'd say review the thread and pick one.
He who does the work gets to make the decision.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-07-26 03:58:29
Subject: Re: filenames in pg_basebackup
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-07-25 22:23:46
Subject: Re: filenames in pg_basebackup

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