Re: slotname vs slot_name - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: slotname vs slot_name
Date
Msg-id CAHGQGwGEntM0Z7ocsn2ztDADuuU-PDZHFTvt=STbr-newB70RA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to slotname vs slot_name  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: slotname vs slot_name  (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>)
Re: slotname vs slot_name  (Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org>)
Re: slotname vs slot_name  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Due to the opened window of the pg_control/catalog version bump a chance
> has opened to fix a inconsistency I've recently been pointed
> towards:
> Namely that replication slots are named 'slot_name' in one half of the
> cases and 'slotname' in the other. That's in views, SRF columns,
> function parameters and the primary_slotname recovery.conf parameter.
>
> My personal tendency would be to make it slot_name everywhere except the
> primary_slotname recovery.conf parameter. There we already have
> precedent for shortening names.
>
> Other opinions?

I like using "slot_name" everywhere, i.e, even in recovery.conf.
primary_slot_name seems not so long name.

BTW, what about also renaming pg_llog directory? I'm afraid that
a user can confuse pg_log with pg_llog.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #9652: inet types don't support min/max
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: New pg_lsn type doesn't have hash/btree opclasses