Thread: Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I'm not really convinced that Bruce's proposed names seem any better to
>> me.  What's wrong with "dead" and "live"?

> In my mind, visible really means "visible to anyone", and expired means
> visible to no one.

Um ... surely, visibility is in the eye of the beholder (no smiley).

I don't have an immediate suggestion for better terminology, but IMHO
the whole point of visible/invisible terminology is that it depends on
who's looking.  Dead and live seem to convey a more appropriate air
of finality.

"Expired" is OK as a synonym for "dead", but there is no thesaurus
anywhere in the world that will suggest it as an antonym for "visible".

            regards, tom lane

Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I'm not really convinced that Bruce's proposed names seem any better to
> >> me.  What's wrong with "dead" and "live"?
>
> > In my mind, visible really means "visible to anyone", and expired means
> > visible to no one.
>
> Um ... surely, visibility is in the eye of the beholder (no smiley).
>
> I don't have an immediate suggestion for better terminology, but IMHO
> the whole point of visible/invisible terminology is that it depends on
> who's looking.  Dead and live seem to convey a more appropriate air
> of finality.
>
> "Expired" is OK as a synonym for "dead", but there is no thesaurus
> anywhere in the world that will suggest it as an antonym for "visible".

OK, so we need new terminology and we need it to be used consistenly in
our documentation, whatever we choose.

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From
Robert Treat
Date:
On Tuesday 26 December 2006 23:12, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > >> I'm not really convinced that Bruce's proposed names seem any better
> > >> to me.  What's wrong with "dead" and "live"?
> > >
> > > In my mind, visible really means "visible to anyone", and expired means
> > > visible to no one.
> >
> > Um ... surely, visibility is in the eye of the beholder (no smiley).
> >
> > I don't have an immediate suggestion for better terminology, but IMHO
> > the whole point of visible/invisible terminology is that it depends on
> > who's looking.  Dead and live seem to convey a more appropriate air
> > of finality.
> >
> > "Expired" is OK as a synonym for "dead", but there is no thesaurus
> > anywhere in the world that will suggest it as an antonym for "visible".
>
> OK, so we need new terminology and we need it to be used consistenly in
> our documentation, whatever we choose.

The current terminology of live and dead is already used in many places in the
documentation and in userspace; mostly around the need for maintainance of
dead tuples within tables, reindex cleaning up dead pages, and even in the
vacuum commands output (n dead tuples cannot be removed yet). Given this
patch came from userland, istm people are comfortable enough with this
terminology there is no need to change it.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From
"Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
> The current terminology of live and dead is already used in many places in the
> documentation and in userspace; mostly around the need for maintainance of
> dead tuples within tables, reindex cleaning up dead pages, and even in the
> vacuum commands output (n dead tuples cannot be removed yet). Given this
> patch came from userland, istm people are comfortable enough with this
> terminology there is no need to change it.

+1

>
--

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate




Re: [PATCHES] Patch(es) to expose n_live_tuples and

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > The current terminology of live and dead is already used in many places in the
> > documentation and in userspace; mostly around the need for maintainance of
> > dead tuples within tables, reindex cleaning up dead pages, and even in the
> > vacuum commands output (n dead tuples cannot be removed yet). Given this
> > patch came from userland, istm people are comfortable enough with this
> > terminology there is no need to change it.
>
> +1

OK.  I will adjust any places that still use expired, and put the patch
into the queue.

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +