14.10.2016, 07:38, Peter Eisentraut kirjoitti:
> On 10/12/16 11:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The main problem we're trying to fix here is people thinking that
>> something with "log" in the name contains discardable data. Just
>> relocating the directory without renaming it won't improve that.
>
> I think it would help if we moved it to something like
> "internal/pg_xlog" and "internal/pg_clog". Keep the name but move it
> out of sight.
>
> We have a tool called pg_xlogdump in the standard installation. initdb
> has an option --xlogdir, pg_basebackup has --xlog and others. Renaming
> the xlog directory would make this all a bit confusing, unless we're
> prepared to rename the programs and options as well.
pg_receivexlog should probably be renamed, seeing how we have
pg_recvlogical perhaps pg_recvwal would work?
The --xlog, -x, --xlog-method and -X flags for pg_basebackup are a bit
confusing as it is. Perhaps they can be kept around as deprecated
aliases for a new --wal stream/fetch switch: I don't think we need new
--wal and --wal-method switches.
pg_resetxlog should probably be called something different than just
plain pg_resetwal to make it obvious that running it will cause data loss.
pg_xlogdump is a developer tool, users shouldn't care; it's hard enough
to use as it is as it doesn't do anything useful when you try to point
it to a recycled wal file.
All in all, I think this is a good opportunity to clarify what the tools
are actually supposed to do and who should be running them. As an
author of a backup tool utilizing some of these tools & options I don't
think renaming commands and/or arguments is a big deal -- we have to
deal with a bunch of changes for every new major version anyway.
/ Oskari
