Re: [HACKERS] Should pg_current_wal_location() becomepg_current_wal_lsn()

On 05/10/2017 12:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> In terms of the alternatives I listed previously, it seems like
>>> nobody liked alternatives #3, #4, or #5, leaving us with #1 (do
>>> nothing) or #2 (apply this patch).  By my count, Peter is the
>>> only one in favor of doing nothing, and is outvoted.  I'll push
>>> the patch later today if I don't hear additional comments.
>
>> For the record, I also voted for doing nothing.
>
> Hm, well, anybody else want to vote?

+1 for #2

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development