On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I'm mostly with Stephen on this. As the names stand, they encourage > people to go look at the documentation, > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/storage-file-layout.html > which will provide more information than you'd ever get out of any > reasonable directory name.
Well, we could change them all to pg_a, pg_b, pg_c, pg_d, ... which would encourage that even more strongly. But I don't think that proposal can be taken seriously. Giving things meaningful names is a good practice in almost every case.
Those don't have the virtue of being at least somewhat
m
nemonic
like pg_xact.
I'll toss my lot in with Steven's and Tom's on this.
I have no problem continuing keeping with historical precedent and allowing mnemonic abbreviations in our directory and file names at this point.