On 01-12-2016 23:02, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> Should we also:
>>>
>>> - rename pg_switch_xlog and friends to pg_switch_wal?
>>> - rename pg_recievexlog to pg_revievewal (and others in bin/)?
>>> - rename pg_xlogdump to pg_waldump?
>>
>> I think yes to all.
>
+1.
> I was hesitant to propose that, but if there is a will do move
> everything... Documentation would point to different pages if the
> utilities are renamed, so that's not helpful when comparing features
> across major releases... We may want to keep those files with their
> historical names.
>
It seems confusing if we rename the tool but not the documentation file
name. Let's put a blinking message in the release notes saying 'tool X
was renamed to tool Y'. The only thing we should do is add on each tool
page something like: pg_waldump (formerly called pg_xlogdump) ...
>>> - if we do rename, should we keep aliases for functions and symlinks for
>>> tools?
>>
>> I think no.
>
+1. If the packager wants to do those aliases, it is up to him/her.
> =# select proname from pg_proc where proname ~ 'xlog';
> proname
> ---------------------------------
> pg_current_xlog_location
> pg_current_xlog_insert_location
> pg_current_xlog_flush_location
> pg_xlogfile_name_offset
> pg_xlogfile_name
> pg_xlog_location_diff
> pg_last_xlog_receive_location
> pg_last_xlog_replay_location
> pg_is_xlog_replay_paused
> pg_switch_xlog
> pg_xlog_replay_pause
> pg_xlog_replay_resume
> (12 rows)
>
In those cases, let's keep the functions as wrappers and undocumented.
In a few releases, we could remove them without breaking softwares that
rely on them.
-- Euler Taveira Timbira - http://www.timbira.com.br/ PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento,
Suporte24x7 e Treinamento