Re: Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn()

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Neha Khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com> writes:
> > [In case forgotten] pg_controdata and pg_waldump interfaces should also
> be
> > considered for this standardization.
>
> > Following are pg_controldata interfaces that might require change:
>
> >   Latest checkpoint location:
> >   Prior checkpoint location:
> >   Latest checkpoint's REDO location:
> >   Minimum recovery ending location:
> >   Backup start location:
> >   Backup end location:
>
> My inclination is to leave these messages alone.  They're not really
> inconsistent with anything.  Where we seem to be ending up is that
> "lsn" will be used in things like function and column names, but
> documentation will continue to spell out phrases like "WAL location".
>
> There is another open thread about converting said phrases to be
> more consistent --- a lot of them currently say "transaction log
> location", which is not a very good choice because it invites
> confusion with pg_xact nee pg_clog.  But I think that's mostly
> just documentation changes, and in any case it's better done as
> a separate patch.
>
>
Are you indicating that the above phrases do not require change because
those are consistent with other references. Or the other thread [1]
(renaming 'transaction log') should take care of it.

Regards,
Neha

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/89ba433e-8990-0aad-238f-55e1d7280ece%402ndquadrant.com