On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> We have the two precedents "pg_subtrans" and "pg_multixact", so >>> unless we want to get into renaming those too, I think "pg_trans" >>> and "pg_xact" are really the only options worth considering. >>> >>> Personally I'd go for "pg_trans", but it's only a weak preference. > >> Heaven forfend we actually use enough characters to make it self-documenting. > > $ ls $PGDATA > PG_VERSION pg_dynshmem/ pg_notify/ pg_stat_tmp/ > postgresql.auto.conf > base/ pg_hba.conf pg_replslot/ pg_subtrans/ postgresql.conf > global/ pg_ident.conf pg_serial/ pg_tblspc/ postmaster.opts > pg_clog/ pg_logical/ pg_snapshots/ pg_twophase/ postmaster.pid > pg_commit_ts/ pg_multixact/ pg_stat/ pg_wal/ > > I don't see one single one of those subdirectory names that I'd call > self-documenting. Are you proposing we rename them all with carpal- > tunnel-syndrome-promoting names?
No. Are you proposing that self-documenting names are a bad thing rather than a good thing? > There's certainly some case to be made for renaming at least one of > "pg_subtrans" and "pg_multixact" so that these three similarly-purposed > subdirectories can all have similar names. But I think on the whole > that's (a) fixing what ain't broken, and (b) making it even more unlikely > that we'll ever get to consensus on changing anything. We've managed to > agree that we need to change the names ending in "log"; let's do that > and be happy that we've removed one foot-gun from the system. I agree that there is an overwhelming consensus in favor of getting "log" out of the names, but I do not agree that the only two possible alternative names are "pg_trans" and "pg_xact", which strikes me as being akin to saying that the only two options for dinner tonight are overripe peaches and lunch meats a week past the sell-by date. If I had to pick only between those two, I suppose I'd go with "pg_xact" which is clear enough to someone familiar with PostgreSQL internals, as opposed to "pg_trans" which I don't think will be clear even to those people. But I don't like either one very much. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
