> On 6 Nov 2024, at 20:28, Maiquel Grassi <gra...@hotmail.com.br> wrote: > > >This function has this name since 600da67fbe5e back from 2008. > >Changing that 16 years later will break things. > > Certainly, there are more considerations to take into account > than I initially realized. One possibility would be to create an > alias (or synonym) for the function "pg_postmaster_start_time", > naming it "pg_postgres_start_time". This way, the name change > could occur gradually and strategically over the coming years, > without immediate impact. I believe this approach could be > viable to facilitate a future transition without abrupt breaks. Maiquel
I can agree that pg_postmaster_ has the potential to be confusing to users, but I agree that if we are to do anything it should be alias while maintaining the old name for compatibility. Looking at similar functions it's clear they don't use the pg_postgres_ prefix, like for example pg_conf_load_time. Should this if so be pg_start_time? -- Daniel Gustafsson
