Re: slotname vs slot_name

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: slotname vs slot_name
Date: 2014-06-05 23:03:35
Message-ID: CAB7nPqTme-QePK4yDjS5zp5474So8Zg_KPfazWyrJZgyWGMNPQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 2:43 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> For my part, I'd strongly prefer a name based on the term "logical
>>> decoding".
>
>> There is no reason not to use long names, so I think pg_logical_decoding
>> is fine.
>
> +1
Indeed. With such a name there is no way to misunderstand its content.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2014-06-05 23:36:23 Re: Allowing join removals for more join types
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-06-05 22:39:13 Re: SP-GiST bug.