Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 202111241854.p5yusjgsp5ln@alvherre.pgsql Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Responses |
Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else?
Re: Should rename "startup process" to something else? |
List | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Nov-23, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: > > On 2021-Nov-20, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> Maybe something along those lines but using a dash/hyphen would work: > >> e.g. wal-replayer > > > Yeah, the idea of a dash occurred to me too. > > Bad memories of uuid-ossp float up ... can we use underscore? I don't object to an underscore, but it looks a bit uglier to me. AFAIK the main problem with uuid-ossp was that it is used as an identifier, so it required quoting, which won't be the case with this process name. Anyway, as a second and separate point, should we rename the other WAL-related process names to use the same character? walreceiver -> wal_receiver / wal-receiver walsender -> wal_sender / wal-sender walwriter -> wal_writer / wal-writer. I assume we would *not* rename other existing processes that already have spaces in their names, such as "autovacuum launcher" to "autovacuum_launcher", as that would be a net loss IMO. Currently, the process list in an idle primary server looks like USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND alvherre 1091970 0.0 0.0 199608 22252 pts/0 S+ 12:22 0:00 /pgsql/install/master/bin/postmaster -p 55432 alvherre 1091983 0.0 0.0 199608 3644 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: checkpointer alvherre 1091984 0.0 0.0 199608 5432 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: background writer alvherre 1091986 0.0 0.0 199608 8956 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: walwriter alvherre 1091987 0.0 0.0 200148 7988 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: autovacuum launcher alvherre 1091988 0.0 0.0 54432 4156 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: stats collector alvherre 1091989 0.0 0.0 200036 6416 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: logical replication launcher I think this looks better: USER PID %CPU %MEM VSZ RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND alvherre 1091970 0.0 0.0 199608 22252 pts/0 S+ 12:22 0:00 /pgsql/install/master/bin/postmaster -p 55432 alvherre 1091983 0.0 0.0 199608 3644 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: checkpointer alvherre 1091984 0.0 0.0 199608 5432 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: background writer alvherre 1091986 0.0 0.0 199608 8956 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: wal-writer alvherre 1091987 0.0 0.0 200148 7988 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: autovacuum launcher alvherre 1091988 0.0 0.0 54432 4156 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: stats collector alvherre 1091989 0.0 0.0 200036 6416 ? Ss 12:22 0:00 \_ postgres: logical replication launcher -- Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
pgsql-hackers by date: