Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Maciek Sakrejda
Subject Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)
Date
Msg-id CAOtHd0AZfvoe+vC7Uv8VSfEGM0XxTHHgw4WKBV=uVC-R06w=kA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)  (Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> One thing I started to wonder about since is whether we should remove the io_
> prefix from io_object, io_context. The prefixes make sense on the C level, but
> it's not clear to me that that's also the case on the table level.

Yeah, +1. It's hard to argue that there would be any confusion,
considering `io_` is in the name of the view.

(Unless, I suppose, some other, non-I/O, "some_object" or
"some_context" column were to be introduced to this view in the
future. But that doesn't seem likely?)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Maciek Sakrejda
Date:
Subject: Re: ANY_VALUE aggregate
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: recovery modules