Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2017-08-16 17:06:42 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> If I understand what this is meant to do, maybe better >> pg_move_replication_slot_lsn() or pg_change_replication_slot_lsn() ? >> The point being that you're adjusting the LSN pointer contained >> in the slot, which is distinct from the slot itself.
> I think we should constrain the API to only allow later LSNs than > currently in the slot, rather than arbitrary ones. That's why I was > thinking of "forward". I'm not convinced it's a good / safe idea to > allow arbitrary values to be set. +1 for constraining it like that, but I don't think that's an argument against using "move" or "change" as the verb. I don't like "forward" because that's not the right word. The only verb senses of "forward" in my Mac's dictionary are "send a message on to a further destination" and "help to advance or promote" (the latter usage is pretty obscure IMO). Neither one seems applicable here. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers