| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: primary_conninfo missing from pg_stat_wal_receiver |
| Date: | 2016-07-06 11:26:41 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqS2LAHXMOK=9qtiSTnzha7ULEOn+TAW9EE6sQ9uF0Raaw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I have one question; why do we call the column "conn_info" instead of
> "conninfo" which is basically used in other places? "conninfo" is better to me.
No real reason for one or the other to be honest. If you want to
change it you could just apply the attached.
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| wal-receiver-conninfo.patch | text/x-diff | 3.7 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2016-07-06 12:46:00 | Re: EXISTS clauses not being optimized in the face of 'one time pass' optimizable expressions |
| Previous Message | Stefan Keller | 2016-07-06 11:19:51 | Re: Forthcoming SQL standards about JSON and Multi-Dimensional Arrays (FYI) |