Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 31271.1589307094@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. ("Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>) |
Ответы |
Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> writes: > 3. I think names observed in wait_event and wait_event_type should not duplicate information. i.e. "XidGenLock" is already"LWLock". Yeah, I'd been wondering about that too: we could strip the "Lock" suffix from all the names in the LWLock category, and make pg_stat_activity output a bit narrower. There are a lot of other things that seem inconsistent, but I'm not sure how much patience people would have for judgment-call renamings. An example is that "ProcSignalBarrier" is under IO, but why? Shouldn't it be reclassified as IPC? Other than that, *almost* all the IO events are named SomethingRead, SomethingWrite, or SomethingSync, which makes sense to me ... should we insist they all follow that pattern? Anyway, I was just throwing this idea out to see if there would be howls of "you can't rename anything" anguish. Since there haven't been so far, I'll spend a bit more time and try to create a concrete list of possible changes. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: