On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 26 August 2016 at 04:39, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am relaunching $subject as 10 development will begin soon. As far as
>> I know, there is agreement that we can do something here. Among the
>> different proposals I have found:
>> - pg_clog renamed to pg_commit_status, pg_xact or pg_commit
>> - pg_xlog renamed to pg_xjournal, pg_wal or pg_journal
>
> Don't mean to be a party pooper, but what discussion and agreement are
> we referring to here?
>
> If we are going to suggest doing something we really should summarize
> the reason for doing it rather than assume it is self evident, cos it
> certainly isn't.
This thread was the previous one on the matter:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAASwCXcVGma9KgEu-ESC6u928mW67noZvnawbPUSW7R7AN9UVg@mail.gmail.com
In short, with the current names, sometimes users think that pg_xlog
and pg_clog are just logs. And so it is fine to delete them to free up
space, corrupting their cluster, because they are just *logs*.
Personally I have seen that, and based on the thread I am not the only
one.
--
Michael
