| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? |
| Date: | 2021-11-18 17:08:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZwtaGVr9izLmQOELY+wQRxJrebQ9ge5Lh08qe141gUAw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 11:05 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Yeah, given current usage it would be better to call it the "recovery
> process". However, I'm feeling dubious that it's worth the cost to
> change. The "startup" name is embedded in a lot of places, I think,
> and people are used to it. I fear changing it would create more
> confusion than it removes.
What sorts of places are you thinking about?
As far as being used to it, I think hackers are, but regular users are
very much not. And there are a lot more regular users than there are
hackers, and it's harder to get them to pay attention, too.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2021-11-18 17:24:14 | Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-11-18 16:56:59 | Mixing CC and a different CLANG seems like a bad idea |