On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 09:31:24AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Jun-08, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:51 PM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > > > Not bad, but I would instead shorten the names to detach-[1234] or
> > > > detach-partition-[1234]. The marginal value of the second word is low, and
> > > > the third word helps even less.
> >
> > Better still, the numbers can change to something descriptive:
> >
> > detach-1 => detach-visibility
> > detach-2 => detach-fk-FOO
> > detach-3 => detach-incomplete
> > detach-4 => detach-fk-BAR
> >
> > I don't grasp the difference between -2 and -4 enough to suggest concrete FOO
> > and BAR words.
>
> Looking at -2, it looks like a very small subset of -4. I probably
> wrote it first and failed to realize I could extend that one rather than
> create -4. We could just delete it.
>
> We also have partition-concurrent-attach.spec; what if we make
> everything a consistent set? We could have
>
> partition-attach
> partition-detach-visibility (-1)
> partition-detach-incomplete (-3)
> partition-detach-fk (-4)
That works for me. I'd be fine with Peter Eisentraut's tweaks, too.
