Horton

Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Vladimir Rusinov <vrusinov@google.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, Cynthia Shang <cynthia.shang@crunchydata.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-01-26T19:13:39Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2017-01-26 14:05:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I completely understand that position.  I have always been doubtful of
> the value of renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal, and I'm not any more
> dedicated to the idea now than I was when I committed that patch.  But
> there was overwhelming support for it, consensus on a level rarely
> seen here.

I think that consistency was based on the change being a narrow
proposition, not a license to run around and change a lot of stuff
including the names of binary.


> I do not think it can be right to rename the directory and not
> anything else.  I stand by what I wrote in
> 
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmobeHP2qbtMvYxG2x8Pm_9utjRya-rom5XL4QuyA26c1Gg@mail.gmail.com

I'm tempted to quote Emerson ;).  I don't think the naming of pg_xlog
vs. pg_wal doesn't actually have that large an impact, to change the
dynamics of the wal vs xlog dichotomy.  Sure it's nothing you'd do in a
new program, but neither is it very bad.

Andres

Commits

  1. Remove all references to "xlog" from SQL-callable functions in pg_proc.

  2. Replace pg_shadow and pg_group by new role-capable catalogs pg_authid