Horton

Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn()

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: 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>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-05-10T19:22:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> In terms of the alternatives I listed previously, it seems like
>> nobody liked alternatives #3, #4, or #5, leaving us with #1 (do
>> nothing) or #2 (apply this patch).  By my count, Peter is the
>> only one in favor of doing nothing, and is outvoted.  I'll push
>> the patch later today if I don't hear additional comments.

> For the record, I also voted for doing nothing.

Hm, well, anybody else want to vote?

			regards, tom lane

Commits

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