> > > Should the pg_log_ prefix strictly refer to functions that write to > > > logs? > > > > > > > I don't know how strict we should be about this, > > I don't know as well and specially given that: > > - the snapshot is logged to the log file (if log level <= DEBUG2)
But unlike pg_log_backend_memory_contexts, the primary purpose of this function is not to write at the LOG message level. > - that name also makes sense from an API point of view as it calls > "LogStandbySnapshot" I don't really see the correlation between the user facing pg_log_ prefix and the Log prefixed functions that write to wal. But this goes back to the main point of should pg_log_ be specific to functions that write to the server logs only. I am making the argument that we should. We have a precedent with pg_stat_ being the prefix for any function related to the cumulative stats. I think it keeps things nicely organized and just overall good code hygiene, but also not sure how we can even enforce such naming conventions. > > The other option could be pg_create_standby_snapshot(), which would be > > similar to the existing function pg_create_restore_point(). I think we > > need to think about backward compatibility if we agree with moving in > > this direction. > > +1 This is slightly better. pg_create_restore_point also writes to wal and _create_ has a more generic meaning. -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
