Horton

Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.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>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>, Cynthia Shang <cynthia.shang@crunchydata.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-01-26T17:32:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> 0002 renames programs whose names contains "xlog".
>
> There have been complaints that pg_receivexlog's name is not consistent
> with pg_recvlogical, and I seem to recall there were some votes for
> renaming pg_receivexlog to match.  We could make it "pg_recvwal" now.

Or prw.  :-)

Personally, I generally push to avoid abbreviations like receive ->
recv.  Yeah, it's a few extra characters of typing, but you can use
tab completion so it's not really a big deal I think.  And the problem
with abbreviating things is that people then have to remember whether
it was abbreviated and in exactly which way.  "Wait, was it recv or
rcv this time?"  Moreover, some of the abbreviations we've used are
potentially opaque to non-English-speakers, or in some cases even to
English speakers.  So I would prefer not to go there.  But if the
consensus is otherwise, so be it.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

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