Re: WAL usage calculation patch

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 8:11 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 6:55 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 9:37 PM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > I tried to take into account all that have been discussed, but I have
> > to admit that I'm absolutely not sure of what was actually decided
> > here. I went with those changes:
> >
> > - rename wal_num_fpw to wal_fpw for consistency, both in pgss view
> > fiel name but also everywhere in the code
> > - change comments to consistently mention "full page writes generated"
> > - changed pgss and explain documentation to mention "full page images
> > generated", from Justin's patch on another thread
> >
>
> I think it is better to use "full page writes" to be consistent with
> other places.
>
> > - kept "amount" of WAL bytes
> >
>
> Okay, but I would like to make another change suggested by Justin
> which is to replace "count" with "number" at a few places.

Ah sorry I missed this one. +1 it also sounds better.

> I have made the above two changes in the attached. Let me know what
> you think about attached?

It all looks good to me!

> > - no change to the explain output as I have no idea what is the
> > consensus (one or two spaces, use semicolon or equal, show unit or
> > not)
> >
>
> Yeah, let's do this separately once we have consensus.

Agreed.