On 2020/09/04 11:50, tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com wrote:
> From: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com>
>>> I changed the view name from pg_stat_walwrites to pg_stat_walwriter.
>>> I think it is better to match naming scheme with other views like
>> pg_stat_bgwriter,
>>> which is for bgwriter statistics but it has the statistics related to backend.
>>
>> I prefer the view name pg_stat_walwriter for the consistency with
>> other view names. But we also have pg_stat_wal_receiver. Which
>> makes me think that maybe pg_stat_wal_writer is better for
>> the consistency. Thought? IMO either of them works for me.
>> I'd like to hear more opinons about this.
>
> I think pg_stat_bgwriter is now a misnomer, because it contains the backends' activity. Likewise, pg_stat_walwriter
leadsto misunderstanding because its information is not limited to WAL writer.
>
> How about simply pg_stat_wal? In the future, we may want to include WAL reads in this view, e.g. reading undo logs
inzheap.
Sounds reasonable.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION