Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)berkus(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vladimir Rusinov <vrusinov(at)google(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Cynthia Shang <cynthia(dot)shang(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal
Date: 2017-02-09 20:37:49
Message-ID: 09a3c4d5-ef83-feb3-ebbc-73ed14869048@berkus.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/09/2017 11:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Agreed, let's just get it done.
>
> Although this doesn't really settle whether we ought to do 3a (with
> backwards-compatibility function aliases in core) or 3b (without 'em).
> Do people want to re-vote, understanding that those are the remaining
> choices?

Does 3a) mean keeping the aliases more-or-less forever?

If not, I vote for 3b. If we're going to need to break stuff, let's
just do it.

If we can keep the aliases for 6-10 years, then I see no reason not to
have them (3a). They're not exactly likely to conflict with user-chosen
names.

--
Josh Berkus
Containers & Databases Oh My!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2017-02-09 20:42:47 Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal
Previous Message Robert Haas 2017-02-09 20:36:04 pgsql: Remove all references to "xlog" from SQL-callable functions in p