On 16 March 2012 16:26, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes:
>> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>>> If you think "cmdtrigger" isn't a good name maybe you should have
>>> picked a different one to start with.
>
>> Well, I think it's a good internal name. I'm not too sure about exposing
>> it, the only reason why it's a good name is because it's a single not
>> too long word, after all. Not very “SQLish”.
>
>> I'm putting cmdtrigger as the user visible name in the next version of
>> the patch, if you come up with something potentially more user friendly
>> feel free to suggest.
>
> How about "commandtrigger" or "command_trigger"? Typing a few more
> characters in this context doesn't seem like a deal-breaker to me.
+1
No objections to either of those suggestions, although I'd lean
towards the one without the underscore, not for any technical reason.
There is a precedent for a type with an underscore in its name
(txid_snapshot) but seems to be the exception.
Thom
