On 2018-Nov-29, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 4:10 AM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:04:12AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote: > > > There's hundreds of other internal uses of xlog that were not touched > > > either, only the user-facing parts were changed. > > > > I have heard of them ;) > > Just wondering if this one is worth renaming as the variable is > > isolated. It is not a big deal to do nothing though. > > Well, if we rename the user-visible part but not the internal part, > then they don't match, which is odd.
But we already did that when we renamed all the xlog to WAL terminology ... why do we care about it now particularly? -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
