On 1/12/17 1:40 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > I just don't buy this argument, at all. These functions names are > certainly not the only things we're changing with PG10 and serious > monitoring/backup/administration tools are almost certainly going to > have quite a bit to adjust to with the new release, and that isn't news > to anyone who works with PG.
I in turn don't buy this argument. ;-) I have checked a variety of WAL-related monitoring scripts, graphing/trending scripts, switchover/failover scripts, and the like, and of course they all make ample use of a variety of *xlog* functions, but as far as I can tell, they don't care about the pg_xlog renaming and would continue to work just fine if the functions were not renamed. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers