On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 10:15 +0200, Csaba Nagy wrote: > On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 10:55 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > IMO, monitor_ seems weird versus track_. To me monitor implies actions > > to be taken when thresholds are met. PostgreSQL doesn't do that. > > PostgreSQL tracks/stores information for application to monitor or > > interact with and those application may doing something based on the > > tracked information. > > Not that my opinion would count too much on hackers, but "track" sounds > better to me too, seems more to the point, not to mention it's shorter > too. > > +1 "track"
track_* wins the vote, so no change to committed code. It's much easier when there's a clear majority, no need for further debate that way. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
