| From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn() |
| Date: | 2017-05-09 16:39:55 |
| Message-ID: | 0c392916-372d-1e3c-ed65-9e36b748006a@pgmasters.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/9/17 10:00 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>
>> #2: Rename all these functions and columns to "lsn", as in this patch.
>
> +1
<...>
> #2 strikes me as the best option, though that's probably not much of a
> surprise to anyone whose been following my comments on this thread.
+1. If anything this analysis make me more convinced it is the right
thing to do.
If I read this correctly, we won't change the names of any functions
that we haven't *already* changed the names of, and only one view would
be changed to bring it into line with the rest.
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-05-09 16:48:01 | Re: idea: custom log_line_prefix components besides application_name |
| Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2017-05-09 16:18:22 | Re: logical replication deranged sender |