Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn()
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>,
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>,
Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>,
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-05-11T14:45:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 01:09:36PM -0700, Joe Conway wrote: > On 05/10/2017 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Hm, well, anybody else want to vote? >>> +1 for #2 >> Same, +1 for #2 (apply this patch) > #1, do nothing. OK, by my count we have For patch: Joe Conway Stephen Frost Kyotaro Horiguchi (*) Petr Jelinek (*) Tom Lane Bruce Momjian David Rowley David Steele Euler Taveira For doing nothing: Peter Eisentraut Robert Haas Michael Paquier I think Kyotaro-san and Petr would have preferred standardizing on "location" over "lsn", but they were definitely not for doing nothing. With or without their votes, it's pretty clear that the ayes have it. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Rename WAL-related functions and views to use "lsn" not "location".
- d10c626de47d 10.0 landed