Re: [PATCH] add relation and block-level filtering to pg_waldump

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 1:43 AM David Christensen
<david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Mar 24, 2022, at 6:43 AM, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:26 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:01 AM Peter Eisentraut
> >>> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> >>> Or even: Why are we exposing fork *numbers* in the user interface?
> >>> Even low-level tools such as pageinspect use fork *names* in their
> >>> interface.
> >>
> >> I wondered about that but thought it seemed OK for such a low level
> >> tool. It's a fair point though, especially if other low level tools
> >> are doing that. Here's a patch to change it.
> >
> > Oh, and there's already a name lookup function to use for this.
>
> +1 on the semantic names.

Cool.

I had another thought while changing that (and also re-alphabetising):
Why don't we switch to -B for --block and -R for --relation? I
gather you used -k and -l because -b and -r were already taken, but
since we already started using upper case for -F, it seems consistent
this way. Or were they chosen for consistency with something else?

It's also slightly more helpful to a user if the help says
--relation=T/D/R instead of N/N/N (TS/DB/REL would be nicer but
doesn't fit in the space).