| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval) |
| Date: | 2013-08-17 00:15:08 |
| Message-ID: | 17235.1376698508@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Why not just call it pg_sleep_int()?
To me, that looks like something that would take an int. I suppose you
could call it pg_sleep_interval(), but that's getting pretty verbose.
The larger picture here though is that that's ugly as sin; it just flies
in the face of the fact that PG *does* have function overloading and we
do normally use it, not invent randomly-different function names to avoid
using it. We should either decide that this feature is worth the small
risk of breakage, or reject it. Not build a camel-designed-by-committee
because no one would speak up for consistency of design.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-17 00:36:20 | Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval) |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-17 00:00:57 | Re: [PATCH] pg_sleep(interval) |