>> I suggest this change to simplify the terminology and make the function >> name more intuitive, as "postgres" directly refers to the database server. >> This seems more suitable to me.
>Seems like an unnecessary change of a publicly facing feature. IMO >stability wins out over any debatable improvement the change may bring.
There are several parts of the system where the term 'postmaster' appears and could potentially be changed to 'postgres'. In most cases, I agree with you: keeping the current term is a more cautious approach and ensures stability. However, in the case of this function, the adjustment is quite simple and doesn’t involve significant changes to the files; it’s really just a matter of 'replacing' the term.
The ease or difficulty of making the change in the server has no meaningful bearing on whether breaking this public API is warranted or not.
