On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 05:14:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:50:43PM +0100, Thom Brown wrote: > >> On 11 April 2012 21:46, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >>> Arguably: > >>> backend_start -> session_start > >>> query_start -> statment_start > > >> Sounds like a lot of potential breakage to solve something I don't > >> think is a problem. Besides, isn't the door for 9.2 changes now > >> closed and bolted? > > We do still have open issues that include such proposed changes, > so I'd say that "too late" isn't a good argument. However ... > > > Well, we renamed procpid -> pid and I noticed these others. Not sure if > > it is a win or not, but just asking. > > We were talking about renaming columns if we changed their semantics. > I don't think renaming for the sake of a slightly cleaner name will > win us any friends.
The "procpid" change was for accuracy, I guess. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
