On 2018-Nov-29, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 4:10 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:04:12AM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> > > There's hundreds of other internal uses of xlog that were not touched
> > > either, only the user-facing parts were changed.
> >
> > I have heard of them ;)
> > Just wondering if this one is worth renaming as the variable is
> > isolated. It is not a big deal to do nothing though.
>
> Well, if we rename the user-visible part but not the internal part,
> then they don't match, which is odd.
But we already did that when we renamed all the xlog to WAL terminology
... why do we care about it now particularly?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services