| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Uh, I change my mind about commit_delay + commit_siblings (sort of) |
| Date: | 2012-06-28 18:55:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaHSpuTj1sL0MTuic02oAnuPSFFAqC+k29p66a84LD_1w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> You think it will confuse users less if we start telling them to use
> something that we have a very long history of telling them not to use?
I don't buy this line of reasoning at all. If we're going to rename
the GUC, it should be for accuracy, not PR value. If we start
renaming something every time we improve it, we're going to go nuts.
We improved lots of things in 9.2; they didn't all get renamed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-06-28 18:58:15 | Re: Uh, I change my mind about commit_delay + commit_siblings (sort of) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-28 18:51:20 | Re: Posix Shared Mem patch |