On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 07:59:58PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > The others you mention could be changed, probably, but I didn't > bother as they didn't seem performance-critical.
It is not really critical indeed. There is an argument to change them so as other folks get used to it though. > (I also wondered whether to use "WAL" instead of "XLog" in that > struct name, but it seems like we've mostly stuck with "xlog" > in internal C names.) XLOG_BLCKSZ is used, which makes me think that XLog is better than WAL here. A matter of taste of course. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
