|From:||Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>|
|To:||Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Vladimir Rusinov <vrusinov(at)google(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: s/xlog/wal/ in tools and function names?|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 01-12-2016 23:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> Should we also:
>>> - rename pg_switch_xlog and friends to pg_switch_wal?
>>> - rename pg_recievexlog to pg_revievewal (and others in bin/)?
>>> - rename pg_xlogdump to pg_waldump?
>> I think yes to all.
> I was hesitant to propose that, but if there is a will do move
> everything... Documentation would point to different pages if the
> utilities are renamed, so that's not helpful when comparing features
> across major releases... We may want to keep those files with their
> historical names.
It seems confusing if we rename the tool but not the documentation file
name. Let's put a blinking message in the release notes saying 'tool X
was renamed to tool Y'. The only thing we should do is add on each tool
page something like: pg_waldump (formerly called pg_xlogdump) ...
>>> - if we do rename, should we keep aliases for functions and symlinks for
>> I think no.
+1. If the packager wants to do those aliases, it is up to him/her.
> =# select proname from pg_proc where proname ~ 'xlog';
> (12 rows)
In those cases, let's keep the functions as wrappers and undocumented.
In a few releases, we could remove them without breaking softwares that
rely on them.
Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
|Next Message||Robert Haas||2016-12-02 20:02:05||Re: Dynamic shared memory areas|
|Previous Message||Robert Haas||2016-12-02 19:56:56||Re: Dynamic shared memory areas|