On 24.04.2024 12:19, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 24 Apr 2024, at 11:13, Anton A. Melnikov <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 24.04.2024 12:02, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> On 19.04.24 05:50, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> May be better use this macro everywhere in C code?
>>> I don't know. I don't find XLOG_CONTROL_FILE to be a very intuitive proxy for "pg_control".
>
> Maybe, but inconsistent usage is also unintuitive.
>
>> Then maybe replace XLOG_CONTROL_FILE with PG_CONTROL_FILE?
>>
>> The PG_CONTROL_FILE_SIZE macro is already in the code.
>> With the best regards,
>
> XLOG_CONTROL_FILE is close to two decades old so there might be extensions
> using it (though the risk might be slim), perhaps using offering it as as well
> as backwards-compatability is warranted should we introduce a new name?
>
To ensure backward compatibility we can save the old macro like this:
#define XLOG_CONTROL_FILE "global/pg_control"
#define PG_CONTROL_FILE XLOG_CONTROL_FILE
With the best wishes,
--
Anton A. Melnikov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
