Horton

Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn()

David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>, Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-05-09T16:39:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 5/9/17 10:00 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>
>> #2: Rename all these functions and columns to "lsn", as in this patch.
>
> +1

<...>

> #2 strikes me as the best option, though that's probably not much of a
> surprise to anyone whose been following my comments on this thread.

+1.  If anything this analysis make me more convinced it is the right 
thing to do.

If I read this correctly, we won't change the names of any functions 
that we haven't *already* changed the names of, and only one view would 
be changed to bring it into line with the rest.

-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net

Commits

  1. Rename WAL-related functions and views to use "lsn" not "location".