On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 26 August 2016 at 04:39, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I am relaunching $subject as 10 development will begin soon. As far as >> I know, there is agreement that we can do something here. Among the >> different proposals I have found: >> - pg_clog renamed to pg_commit_status, pg_xact or pg_commit >> - pg_xlog renamed to pg_xjournal, pg_wal or pg_journal > > Don't mean to be a party pooper, but what discussion and agreement are > we referring to here? > > If we are going to suggest doing something we really should summarize > the reason for doing it rather than assume it is self evident, cos it > certainly isn't.
This thread was the previous one on the matter: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/caaswcxcvgma9kgeu-esc6u928mw67nozvnawbpusw7r7an9...@mail.gmail.com In short, with the current names, sometimes users think that pg_xlog and pg_clog are just logs. And so it is fine to delete them to free up space, corrupting their cluster, because they are just *logs*. Personally I have seen that, and based on the thread I am not the only one. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
