Robert Haas wrote:
> > BTW, the stuff that we have in pg_llog are not really logs at all, so
> > pg_llog was always a misnomer.
>
> Also true.
>
> For my part, I'd strongly prefer a name based on the term "logical
> decoding". This feature has lots of names (change-set extraction,
> logical replication, blah blah) and I worked pretty hard to make sure
> that the core patch as committed referred to it in just one way
> (logical decoding) everywhere. I'd rather not call this pg_lcse or
> pg_lcset or something like that because now we're introducing other
> terminology that's not used elsewhere. I'll defer to the group on
> whether it should be called pg_logical or pg_logicaldecoding or
> pg_logical_decoding or pg_ldecoding or pg_logdec or
> pg_lOgIcAl___DECODing, but it should be something somehow based on
> that term.
There is no reason not to use long names, so I think pg_logical_decoding
is fine.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
