Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
Date: 2016-08-26 15:58:45
Message-ID: CABUevExt-XUkHRc-tbQHrCukY=z8_3kDcAhc05_fULfF9q-Fzg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Aug 26, 2016 5:54 PM, "Peter Eisentraut" <
peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 8/25/16 10:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > I am relaunching $subject as 10 development will begin soon. As far as
> > I know, there is agreement that we can do something here. Among the
> > different proposals I have found:
> > - pg_clog renamed to pg_commit_status, pg_xact or pg_commit
> > - pg_xlog renamed to pg_xjournal, pg_wal or pg_journal
>
> If we're going to do some renaming, then I suggest we do a
> mini-file-system structure under $PGDATA, like
>
> $PGDATA/etc
> $PGDATA/log
> $PGDATA/run (lock files etc.)
> $PGDATA/tmp
> $PGDATA/var
>
> The names of all the things under "var" could still be refined, but it's
> much less likely that users will confuse data with configuration or
> plain logs under that scheme

Interesting idea. I worry a bit that this might encourage distributions to
split it up into different places though, and I'm not sure we want to
encourage that..

/Magnus

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2016-08-26 15:58:52 Re: [HACKERS] Unsupported feature F867: WITH TIES
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-08-26 15:56:56 Re: PG_DIAG_SEVERITY and a possible bug in pq_parse_errornotice()