| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Generic WAL logical messages |
| Date: | 2016-02-01 08:51:57 |
| Message-ID: | CALLjQTSfVk5L9Gv4UkT7Gtgv8VU1k08=piEwV-+aa=RQN0Sh=w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1 February 2016 at 09:45, Alexander Korotkov
<a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On 29 January 2016 at 21:11, Alexander Korotkov
>> <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
>>>
>>> Should we think more about naming? Does two kinds of generic records
>>> confuse people?
>>
>>
>> Logical messages
>>
>> Generic WAL records
>>
>> Seems like I can tell them apart. Worth checking, but I think we're OK.
>
>
> I was worrying because topic name is "Generic WAL logical messages". But if
> we name them just "Logical messages" then it's OK for me.
>
Yeah the patch talks about logical messages, I use different title in
mailing list and CF to make it more clear on first sight what this
actually is technically.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-02-01 09:13:34 | Re: Template for commit messages |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2016-02-01 08:47:52 | Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches |