On Thu, 2023-08-24 at 18:23 +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 15:13, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Jul 2023, 13:58 Laurenz Albe, <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
> > > I agree that the name "max_local_update" could be improved.
> > > Perhaps "avoid_hot_above_size_mb".
> >
> > Or "hot_table_size_threshold" or "hot_update_limit"?
>
> Although I like these names, it doesn't quite cover the use of the
> parameter for me, as updated tuples prefer to be inserted on the same
> page as the old tuple regardless of whether HOT applies.
>
> How about 'local_update_limit'?
I agree with your concern. I cannot think of a better name than yours.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe