On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 9:45 AM Amit Kapila <[email protected]> wrote: > > 6. Commit message states: > "If the user chooses to enable logging to a table (by selecting > 'table' or 'all'), > an internal logging table named conflict_log_table_<subid> is automatically > created .." > > I see that the patch creates a table with the name > pg_conflict_<subid>. Apart from updating the commit message, how about > naming the table as pg_conflict_log_<subid> or pg_subconflict_<subid>. > In the first alternative pg_conflict_log_<subid>, the table name in > isolation without schema name describes its purpose, the second > alternative breaks the repetitiveness of pg_conflict when used with > schema like pg_conflict.pg_conflict_16394. >
+1 for pg_conflict.pg_conflict_log_<subid>. It feels more intuitive, and it leaves room for other tables with the pg_conflict_* prefix in the pg_conflict schema if needed in the future. thanks Shveta
