Re: unlogged tables
David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
From: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm@rice.edu>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>, marcin mank <marcin.mank@gmail.com>, Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2010-11-17T20:58:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 03:48:52PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 11/17/2010 03:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >I don't particularly care for the name UNSYNCED, and I'm starting > >not to like UNLOGGED much either, although at least that one is an > >actual word. PERMANENT and the flavors of TEMPORARY are a > >reasonably comprehensible as a description of user-visible > >behavior, but UNLOGGED and UNSYNCED sounds a lot like they're > >discussing internal details that the user might not actually > >understand or care about. I don't have a better idea right off the > >top of my head, though. > > Maybe VOLATILE for UNSYNCED? Not sure about UNLOGGED. +1 for describing the end-user-visible behavior. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate