Le 04/11/2016 à 00:34, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : > On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:26:27 +0100 > Gilles Darold <gilles.dar...@dalibo.com> wrote: > >> Le 30/10/2016 à 08:04, Karl O. Pinc a écrit : >>> Have you given any thought to my proposal to change >>> CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME to LOG_METAINFO_FILE? >> Yes, I don't think the information logged in this file are kind of >> meta information and CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME seems obvious. > To me, the CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME symbol should contain the name > of the current log file. It does not. The CURRENT_LOG_FILENAME symbol > holds the name of the file which itself contains the name of > the log file(s) being written, plus the log file > structure of each log file. > > IMO, the name of the log files being written, as well as > the type of data structure written into each log file, > are meta-information about the logging data. So maybe > the right name is LOG_METAINFO_DATAFILE. > > If you're not happy with making this change that's fine. > If not, I'd like to make mention of the symbol name to > the committers.
If it need to be changed I would prefer something like CURRENT_LOG_INFO, but this is not really important. Please mention it, and the committer will choose to change it or not. -- Gilles Darold Consultant PostgreSQL http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
