Re: WAL usage calculation patch

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 1:22 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 8:12 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 08:35:51AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:35 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:16 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > >>> The internal symbol for the WAL record is
> > >>> XLOG_FPI and xlogdesc.c prints it as "FPI".
> > >
> > > Julien, Peter, others do you have any opinion here? I think it is
> > > better if we decide on one of FPW or FPI and make the changes at all
> > > places for this patch.
> >
> > It seems to me that Peter is right here. A full-page write is the
> > action to write a full-page image, so if you consider only a way to
> > define the static data of a full-page and/or a quantity associated to
> > it, we should talk about full-page images.
>

Fair enough, if more people want full-page image terminology in this
context then we can do that.

> I agree with that definition. I can send a cleanup patch if there's
> no objection.
>

Okay, feel free to send the patch. Thanks for taking the initiative
to write a patch for this.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com