| From: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Command to prune archive at restartpoints |
| Date: | 2010-06-09 01:45:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20100609104520.BD02.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> >> I prefer archive_cleanup_command. We should name things after their
> >> principal function, not an implementation detail, IMNSHO.
> >
> > Weak preference for archive_cleanup_command here.
>
> OK, sounds like we have consensus on that. Who wants to do it?
Do we just need to replace all of them? If so, patch attached.
I replaced 3 terms: recovery_end_command, recovery-end-command,
and recoveryEndCommand.
Regards,
---
Takahiro Itagaki
NTT Open Source Software Center
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| archive_cleanup_command.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-09 01:51:00 | Re: [BUGS] Invalid YAML output from EXPLAIN |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-09 01:38:17 | Re: How about closing some Open Items? |