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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
