Re: pg_receivexlog and replication slots

On 2014-10-04 14:25:27 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2014-10-03 14:02:08 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > I do wonder whether --create/--drop aren't somewhat wierd for
> >> > > pg_receivexlog. It's not that clear what it means. It'd be ugly, but
> >> we
> >> > > could rename them --create-slot/drop-slot.
> >> >
> >> > +1 on doing it, -1 on it being ugly.
> >>
> >> The reason I'm calling it uglyu is that it's different from
> >> pg_recvlogical. We could change it there, too? A bit late, but probably
> >> better than having a discrepancy forever
> >>
> > I'm on board to make things as consistent as possible between both
> > utilities, the only reason why --create/--drop are used in my patch is for
> > the sake of consistency btw. 9.4 ship has not sailed yet, and IMO it is
> > important from the user prospective if options are a maximum consistent
> > between pg_receivexlog and pg_recvlogical. That would be even better if
> > change is done before 9.4beta3 shows up, and I doubt that there are many
> > users using the --create/--drop options already.
> >
> And as I am on it, attached is a patch that can be applied to master and
> REL9_4_STABLE to rename the --create and --drop to --create-slot and
> --drop-slot.

Misses logicaldecoding.sgml... I'll fix that up, once there's agreement
whether we should continue accept the old form. No need to send a new
version.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services