| From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Subject: | Re: Report buffer access strategies in EXPLAIN |
| Date: | 2026-11-06 08:17:13 |
| Message-ID: | au2NCcVRisuQK3jN@bdtpg |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 11:18:07AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 05:51:08PM -0800, Lukas Fittl wrote:
> > Is there a reason we feel that "strategy ring" is the better choice?
> > If we wanted to make it more clear that its a ring buffer used as part
> > of a buffer access strategy maybe we can do "strategy ring buffer"?
> > (or "strategic ring buffer"?)
>
> It's used in the glossary of the documentation on HEAD, at least. I'd
> tend to agree that "Buffer Access Strategy ring" would be a more
> complete term when not in the context of the glossary page. If the
> BAS are explicitely described, like in the glossary, "strategy ring"
> reads fine.
That makes sense to me. I'll keep "strategy ring" in the glossary and change the
pg_stat_io wording to "Buffer Access Strategy ring" in v5.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2026-11-06 08:26:51 | Re: Report buffer access strategies in EXPLAIN |
| Previous Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2026-11-06 08:14:31 | Re: Report buffer access strategies in EXPLAIN |