On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Craig Ringer
>> <craig.ringer@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> Cool. I'll mark as waiting on author pending that.
>>>
>>> It'll be good to get this footgun put away.
>>
>> OK, so done. I have put the renaming of pg_xlog to pg_wal on top patch
>> stack as that's the one making no discussion it seems: a lot of people
>> like pg_wal. I have added as well handling for the renaming in
>> pg_basebackup by using PQserverVersion. One thing to note is that a
>> connection needs to be made to the target server *before* creating the
>> soft link of pg_xlog/pg_wal because we need to know the version of the
>> target server. pg_upgrade is handled as well. And that's all in 0001.
>>
>> Patch 0002 does pg_clog -> pg_trans, "trans" standing for
>> "transaction". Switching to pg_trans_status or pg_xact_status is not
>> that complicated to change anyway...
>
> Any input to offer for those patches? If there is nothing happening, I
> guess that the best move is just to move it to next CF. At least I can
> see that the flow would be to get those renamings done.
+1 for pg_xlog -> pg_wal.
Of the existing suggestions, would like to add my vote for the
following renames, matching pg_multixact:
pg_clog -> pg_xact
pg_subtrans -> pg_subxact
If longer names are on the table, I would consider expanding all three of those:
pg_clog -> pg_transaction
pg_subtrans -> pg_subtransaction
pg_multixact -> pg_multitransaction
They sound eminently non-deletable.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
