Re: DTrace probes patch

From: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: DTrace probes patch
Date: 2008-12-19 21:43:01
Message-ID: 494C1565.3060105@sun.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Fujii Masao" <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
>> I understood your intention. But, I think that its function name is somewhat
>> confusing.
>>
>
> I agree. If the probe is meant to track only *some* WAL writes
> then it needs to be named something less generic than
> TRACE_POSTGRESQL_WAL_BUFFER_WRITE.
>
>
How about change it to TRACE_POSTGRESQL_WAL_BUFFER_WRITE_DIRTY similar to TRACE_POSTGRESQL_BUFFER_WRITE_DIRTY for shared buffers?

-Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-12-19 21:55:19 generic reloptions improvement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-12-19 21:32:51 Re: Windowing Function Patch Review -> Standard Conformance