On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > I still find it wierd/inconsistent to have: > > * pg_receivexlog > > * pg_recvlogical > > binaries, even from the same source directory. Why once "pg_recv" and > > once "pg_receive"? > > +1 > Digging up a really old thread since I just got annoyed by the inconsistent naming the first time myself :) I can't find that this discussion actually came to a proper consensus, but I may be missing something. Did we go with pg_recvlogical just because we couldn't decide on a better name, or did we intentionally decide it was the best? I definitely think pg_receivelogical would be a better name, for consistency (because it's way too late to rename pg_receivexlog of course - once released that can't really chance. Which is why *if* we want to change the name of pg_recvxlog we have a few more days to make a decision..) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
