On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:17 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Craig Ringer >> <craig.rin...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Cool. I'll mark as waiting on author pending that. >>> >>> It'll be good to get this footgun put away. >> >> OK, so done. I have put the renaming of pg_xlog to pg_wal on top patch >> stack as that's the one making no discussion it seems: a lot of people >> like pg_wal. I have added as well handling for the renaming in >> pg_basebackup by using PQserverVersion. One thing to note is that a >> connection needs to be made to the target server *before* creating the >> soft link of pg_xlog/pg_wal because we need to know the version of the >> target server. pg_upgrade is handled as well. And that's all in 0001. >> >> Patch 0002 does pg_clog -> pg_trans, "trans" standing for >> "transaction". Switching to pg_trans_status or pg_xact_status is not >> that complicated to change anyway... > > Any input to offer for those patches? If there is nothing happening, I > guess that the best move is just to move it to next CF. At least I can > see that the flow would be to get those renamings done.
+1 for pg_xlog -> pg_wal. Of the existing suggestions, would like to add my vote for the following renames, matching pg_multixact: pg_clog -> pg_xact pg_subtrans -> pg_subxact If longer names are on the table, I would consider expanding all three of those: pg_clog -> pg_transaction pg_subtrans -> pg_subtransaction pg_multixact -> pg_multitransaction They sound eminently non-deletable. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers