On 16 March 2012 16:26, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Dimitri Fontaine <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> writes: >> Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >>> If you think "cmdtrigger" isn't a good name maybe you should have >>> picked a different one to start with. > >> Well, I think it's a good internal name. I'm not too sure about exposing >> it, the only reason why it's a good name is because it's a single not >> too long word, after all. Not very “SQLish”. > >> I'm putting cmdtrigger as the user visible name in the next version of >> the patch, if you come up with something potentially more user friendly >> feel free to suggest. > > How about "commandtrigger" or "command_trigger"? Typing a few more > characters in this context doesn't seem like a deal-breaker to me.
+1 No objections to either of those suggestions, although I'd lean towards the one without the underscore, not for any technical reason. There is a precedent for a type with an underscore in its name (txid_snapshot) but seems to be the exception. Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
