On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 03:21:36PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:44 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > ... or we could shorten those file names. I recall an episode > > awhile ago where somebody complained that their version of "tar" > > couldn't handle some of the path names in our tarball, so > > keeping things from getting to carpal-tunnel-inducing lengths > > does have its advantages. > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:51 PM Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > > Not bad, but I would instead shorten the names to detach-[1234] or > > detach-partition-[1234]. The marginal value of the second word is low, and > > the third word helps even less.
Better still, the numbers can change to something descriptive: detach-1 => detach-visibility detach-2 => detach-fk-FOO detach-3 => detach-incomplete detach-4 => detach-fk-BAR I don't grasp the difference between -2 and -4 enough to suggest concrete FOO and BAR words. > Alright, CC'ing Alvaro who added the long names to see if he wants to > consider that.
