On 06/14/2011 08:04 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
For me, the litmus test is whether the change provides enough
improvement that it outweighs the disruption when the user runs into
it.
For the procpid that started all of this, the clear answer is no. I'm
surprised people seriously considered making this change. It's a
historical accident: document and move on.
It is a bug in consistency, the table pg_locks uses "pid" where
pg_stat_activity uses "procpid". That is a bug and all bugs are
accidents. We take a lot of care in fixing bugs.
This isn't just about a few characters in a query, it is about
consistency and providing an overall more sane user experience. Frankly
I don't care if we use procpid or pid but it should be one or the other
not both.
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
@cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
