Re: [HACKERS] pg_statistic_ext.staenabled might not be the best column name - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] pg_statistic_ext.staenabled might not be the best column name
Date
Msg-id 11427.1492086486@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] pg_statistic_ext.staenabled might not be the best column name  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] pg_statistic_ext.staenabled might not be the bestcolumn name  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 04/12/2017 03:36 PM, David Rowley wrote:
>> "stakind" seems like a better name. I'd have personally gone with
>> "statype" but pg_statistic already thinks stakind is better.

> +1 to stakind

I agree with that, but as long as we're rethinking column names here,
was it a good idea to use the same "sta" prefix in pg_statistic_ext
as in pg_statistic?  I do not think there's anyplace else where we're
using the same table-identifying prefix in two different catalogs,
and it seems a little pointless to follow that convention at all if
we're not going to make it a unique prefix.

We could go with "ste" perhaps, or break the convention of 3-character
prefixes and go with "stae".
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.
Next
From: Yorick Peterse
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Document the order of changing certain settingswhen using hot-standby servers