| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog |
| Date: | 2016-08-29 17:05:23 |
| Message-ID: | 58c80788-ea68-c38b-ca88-04cd37a489d6@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/29/2016 10:00 AM, Daniel Verite wrote:
> Let's imagine that pg_xlog is named wal instead.
> How does that help our user with the disk space problem?
> Does that point to a path of resolution? I don't see it.
> What do we think that user's next move will be?
> After all, WAL means Write Ahead *Log*.
If, they look it up (which they would likely have to) they will see it
isn't removable. :D That is the point I am making. If it is called xlog
the brain says "logs". If it says wal the brain says, "What is wal?"
At that point they have to look it up and then if they still delete it;
well that is what emergency rates are for :P
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2016-08-29 17:22:22 | Re: OpenSSL 1.1 breaks configure and more |
| Previous Message | Daniel Verite | 2016-08-29 17:00:43 | Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog |