> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: 04 July 2005 14:54
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Dawid Kuroczko; Andreas Pflug; Bruce Momjian;
> PostgreSQL-patches; PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Dbsize backend integration
>
> "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> > Aside from the fact that's a change to the API that we had
> settled on,
> > it doesn't solve the actual problem of needing a suitable name for a
> > function that returns the size of a table /or/ index.
> pg_relation_size()
> > or pg_table_size() can't be used for precisely the reason they were
> > rejected for that purpose in the first place.
>
> Rejected by whom? pg_relation_size is an excellent choice for that.
Bruce didn't like it
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-06/msg01410.php), and
you seemed to object as well
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-06/msg01247.php)
Personally I'm beyond caring much now as the amount of time spent trying
to name these simple functions is wildly disproportionate the the effort
take to actually code them. I think we just need to agree there is no
perfect name and rely on the comments and docs to guide people. I think
the current names work OK, and Bruce and Dawid at least agree!
Regards, Dave.
