On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
>> You may want to name the new headers dedicated to WAL records with _xlog.h
>> as suffix though, like gin_xlog.h instead of ginxlog.h.
>
> Should not it be more consistent to use "*_wal.h", after all these efforts
> to move "xlog" to "wal" everywhere?
I believe that what was agreed was to eliminate "xlog" from
user-facing parts of the system, not internal details. If we're going
to eliminate it from the internals, we should do that in a systematic
way, not just in the parts that happen to be getting changed from by
some other patch. But personally I think that would be more trouble
than it's worth. It would severely complicate future back-patching --
even more than what we've done already -- for not a whole lot of gain.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
