| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vladimir Rusinov <vrusinov(at)google(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(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: | 2017-01-26 19:37:07 |
| Message-ID: | 20170126193707.ate32c6s7wgr5bve@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-01-26 14:28:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:24 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >> Whether the voters recognized that fact at the time I would have to concur
> >> that if we are going to change from xlog to wal we should be all-in. If
> >> you want to vote to reject putting the whole camel in the tent I would say
> >> its a vote for reverting the change that put the camel's nose in there in
> >> the first place.
> >
> > WTF.
>
> I think that response is unwarranted. I happen to agree entirely with
> his position.
I don't. Considering intent imo is important. David (and you?) is
basically saying "screw it, you voted for that person, you aren't
allowed to have an opinion anymore", and that's way outside of what I
consider acceptable. So, because you think it doesn't make sense to
view renaming pg_xlog vs pg_wal as separate from a global s/xlog/wal/,
nobody else can have that position. And on top of that David's
underlying that argument with a metaphor that basically implies the
other party is getting screwed over. Sorry, that's not the way I want
decisions to be made here.
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-01-26 19:42:14 | Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2017-01-26 19:36:11 | Re: Allow interrupts on waiting standby |