On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 17:31, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>>>> Actually, after some IM chats, I think pg_streamrecv should be
>>>> renamed, probably to pg_walstream (or pg_logstream, but pg_walstream
>>>> is a lot more specific than that)
>
>>> pg_stream_log
>>> pg_stream_backup
>
>> Those seem better.
>
>> Tom, would those solve your concerns about it being clear which side
>> they are on? Or do you think you'd still risk reading them as the
>> sending side?
>
> It's still totally unclear what they do. How about "pg_receive_log"
> etc?
I agree with whomever said using "wal" is better than "log" to be unambiguous.
So it'd be pg_receive_wal and pg_receive_base_backup then? Votes from
others? (it's easy to rename so far, so I'll keep plugging away under
the name pg_basebackup based on Fujii-sans comments until such a time
as we have a reasonable consensus :-)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
