| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. |
| Date: | 2020-05-13 02:35:45 |
| Message-ID: | 4929.1589337345@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:16 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Hash/Batch/Allocating
>> Hash/Batch/Electing
>> Hash/Batch/Loading
>> Hash/GrowBatches/Allocating
> Perhaps we should also drop the 'ing' from the verbs, to be more like
> ...Read etc.
Yeah, that aspect was bothering me too. Comparing these to other
wait event names, you could make a case for either "Allocate" or
"Allocation"; but there are no other names with -ing.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-13 02:54:48 | Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-05-13 02:30:09 | Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster. |