Re: WAL usage calculation patch
От | Julien Rouhaud |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WAL usage calculation patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOBaU_ZbVMGta+1OkTn3qsPd=myi9cgv1hQFpdrQZdhDOjq8PA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WAL usage calculation patch (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WAL usage calculation patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 6:16 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:45 PM Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > On 2020-04-14 05:57, Amit Kapila wrote: > > > Peter E, others, any suggestions on how to move forward? I think here > > > we should follow the rule "follow the style of nearby code" which in > > > this case would be to have one space after each field as we would like > > > it to be closer to the "Buffers" format. It would be good if we have > > > a unified format among all Explain stuff but we might not want to > > > change the existing things and even if we want to do that it might be > > > a broader/bigger change and we should do that as a PG14 change. What > > > do you think? > > > > If looks like shortening to fpw= and using one space is the easiest way > > to solve this issue. > > > > I am fine with this approach and will change accordingly. I will wait > for a few days (3-4 days) to see if someone shows up with either an > objection to this or with a better idea for the display of WAL usage > information. That was also my preferred alternative. PFA a patch for that. I also changed to "fpw" for the non textual output for consistency.
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: