Re: Pluggable cumulative statistics
От | Bertrand Drouvot |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Pluggable cumulative statistics |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZozJN1DMx2BMVhpH@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Pluggable cumulative statistics (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Pluggable cumulative statistics
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 10:45:05AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 07:22:32AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote: > > Yeah, what I meant to say is that one could think for example that's the > > PgStatShared_Archiver size while in fact it's the PgStat_ArchiverStats size. > > I think it's more confusing when writing the stats. Here we are manipulating > > "snapshot" and "snapshot" offsets. It was not that confusing when reading as we > > are manipulating "shmem" and "shared" offsets. > > > > As I said, the code is fully correct, that's just the wording here that sounds > > weird to me in the "snapshot" context. > > After sleeping on it, I can see your point. If we were to do the > (shared_data_len -> stats_data_len) switch, could it make sense to > rename shared_data_off to stats_data_off to have a better symmetry? > This one is the offset of the stats data in a shmem entry, so perhaps > shared_data_off is OK, but it feels a bit inconsistent as well. Agree that if we were to rename one of them then the second one should be renamed to. I gave a second thought on it, and I think that this is the "data" part that lead to the confusion (as too generic), what about? shared_data_len -> shared_stats_len shared_data_off -> shared_stats_off That looks ok to me even in the snapshot context (shared is fine after all because that's where the stats come from). Attached a patch proposal doing so. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: