On 2020-04-01 03:55, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Agreed. I ended up moving "wal" as a separate word, since it looks
> cleaner; patch attached. Tools that look for the backend type in
> pg_stat_activity would need to be adjusted; it would be an
> incompatibility. Maybe changing it would cause too much disruption.
Yeah, it's probably not worth the change for that reason. There is no
confusion what the "archiver" is. Also, we have archive_mode,
archive_command, etc. without a wal_ prefix. Let's leave it as is.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
