Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Craig Ringer
Subject Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog
Date
Msg-id CAMsr+YEKaBBYoW+vTUTKjiEufWO7QfU53_gCreq9YKZ4fKwQJw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Re: Renaming of pg_xlog and pg_clog  ("Daniel Verite" <daniel@manitou-mail.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
<p dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr">On 29 Aug 2016 12:10 PM, "Jim Nasby" <<a
href="mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com">Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > On 8/26/16 4:08 PM,
AndresFreund wrote:<br /> >><br /> >> Splitting of ephemeral data seems to have a benefit, the rest seems
more<br/> >> like rather noisy busywork to me.<br /> ><br /> ><br /> > People accidentally blowing away
pg_clogor pg_xlog is a pretty common occurrence, and I don't think there's all that many tools that reference them. I
thinkit's well worth renaming them.<p dir="ltr">Yeah. I've seen it in BIG production users who really should have known
better.<p dir="ltr">People won't see a README in amongst 5000 xlog segments while freaking out about the sever being
down.<pdir="ltr">I don't care if it comes as part of some greater reorg or not but I'll be really annoyed if scope
creeplands up killing the original proposal to just rename these dirs. I think that a simple rename should be done
first.Then if some greater reorg is to be done it can be done shortly after. The only people that'll upset are folks
trackingearly 10.0 dev and they'll be aware it's coming. 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Venkata B Nagothi
Date:
Subject: Re: patch proposal
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)