On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 05:37:09PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 02:23:30PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > > > The naming is not arbitrary. -1 to changing it as suggested. > > > > > > It is as Aidan says, a state between receive and fsync, normally > > > referred to as write. > > > > > > Plus the word remote denotes it is on the standby, not the local master. > > > > > > So both words have specific meaning, and IMHO clear meaning. > > > > Clear to a postgres hacker, maybe. Not at *all* clear to our general users. > > > > The natural assumption is that "remote write" means that it's written to > > disk on the remote. Which is not what it means. > > Right, and if we are wrapping beta tomorrow, it would be good for us to > decide soon. We can always change it after beta, but sooner is better.
And I will take the blame for brining it up so near beta --- I only realized when writing the release notes (which should be announced in a few hours). -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
