Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Glen Parker <glenebob(at)nwlink(dot)com>, Postgresql Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and
Date: 2006-12-27 03:43:27
Message-ID: 11314.1167191007@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I'm not really convinced that Bruce's proposed names seem any better to
>> me.  What's wrong with "dead" and "live"?

> In my mind, visible really means "visible to anyone", and expired means
> visible to no one.

Um ... surely, visibility is in the eye of the beholder (no smiley).

I don't have an immediate suggestion for better terminology, but IMHO
the whole point of visible/invisible terminology is that it depends on
who's looking.  Dead and live seem to convey a more appropriate air
of finality.

"Expired" is OK as a synonym for "dead", but there is no thesaurus
anywhere in the world that will suggest it as an antonym for "visible".

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-12-27 04:10:10
Subject: Re: Load distributed checkpoint
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-12-27 03:33:14
Subject: Re: Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-12-27 04:10:10
Subject: Re: Load distributed checkpoint
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-12-27 03:33:14
Subject: Re: Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group