On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:23 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hi, > > On 2020-06-15 19:54:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: > > > On 15 Jun 2020, at 20:22, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > >> 1) 'postmaster'. As changing that would be somewhat invasive, the word > > >> is a bit more ambiguous, and it's largely just internal, I've left > > >> this alone for now. I personally would rather see this renamed as > > >> supervisor, which'd imo actually would also be a lot more > > >> descriptive. I'm willing to do the work, but only if there's at least > > >> some agreement. > > > > > FWIW, I've never really liked the name postmaster as I don't think it > conveys > > > meaning. I support renaming to supervisor or a similar term. > > > > Meh. That's carrying PC naming foibles to the point where they > > negatively affect our users (by breaking start scripts and such). > > I think we should leave this alone. > > postmaster is just a symlink, which we very well could just leave in > place... I was really just thinking of the code level stuff. And I think > there's some clarity reasons to rename it as well (see comments by > others in the thread). > > Is the symlink even used? If not we could just get rid of it. I'd be more worried about for example postmaster.pid, which would break a *lot* of scripts and integrations. postmaster is also exposed in the system catalogs. -- Magnus Hagander Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/> Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>
