Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinxhJDhs75qf3fgetbe0U46WiZn9PpuQGtmup0H@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 16:27, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 16:20 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 16:18, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> >> Hmm. I don't like those names at all :(
>> >
>> > I agree.  I don't think your original names are bad, as long as
>> > they're well-documented.  I sympathize with Simon's desire to make it
>> > clear that these use the replication framework, but I really don't
>> > want the command names to be that long.
>>
>> 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?


--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: REVIEW: Extensions support for pg_dump
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_basebackup for streaming base backups