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: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, 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: 2017-01-26T19:24:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2017-01-26 12:23:24 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> >
> >
> ​Whether the voters recognized that fact at the time I would have to concur
> that if we are going to change from xlog to wal we​ should be all-in.  If
> you want to vote to reject putting the whole camel in the tent I would say
> its a vote for reverting the change that put the camel's nose in there in
> the first place.

WTF.

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