Hi, On 2025-04-04 11:55:41 -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: > > > > 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.
I think this would all be a nice argument to have when introducing a new function. But I don't think it's a wart sufficiently big to justify breaking compatibility. Greetings, Andres Freund
