On 2017-01-26 12:23:24 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
> > On 2017-01-26 14:05:43 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > I completely understand that position. I have always been doubtful of
> > > the value of renaming pg_xlog to pg_wal, and I'm not any more
> > > dedicated to the idea now than I was when I committed that patch. But
> > > there was overwhelming support for it, consensus on a level rarely
> > > seen here.
> >
> > I think that consistency was based on the change being a narrow
> > proposition, not a license to run around and change a lot of stuff
> > including the names of binary.
> >
> >
> Whether the voters recognized that fact at the time I would have to concur
> that if we are going to change from xlog to wal we should be all-in. If
> you want to vote to reject putting the whole camel in the tent I would say
> its a vote for reverting the change that put the camel's nose in there in
> the first place.
WTF.