From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Cc: Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] "distributed checkpoint"
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:22:10 +0000
Message-ID: <1197051730.4255.603.camel@ebony.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071207034328.GB18310@fetter.org>
References: <20071206220348.GM8451@alvh.no-ip.org>
<5958.1196991889@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20071206191944.1d7926d2@commandprompt.com>
<20071207034328.GB18310@fetter.org>
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 19:43 -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 07:19:44PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:44:49 -0500
> > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >
> > > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> > > > Am I the only one who finds the phrase "distributed checkpointing"
> > > > a bit awkward? Would it be better if we used "time-distributed
> > > > checkpointing" instead?
> > >
> > > Yeah, "distributed" has a bunch of connotations that are wrong for
> > > this purpose.
> > >
> > > I spent a bit of time with a thesaurus but didn't come up with
> > > anything that seemed le mot juste. Best I could do was "spread
> > > checkpoint" or "time-extended checkpoint". Anybody have a better
> > > idea?
> >
> > balanced
> > gradual
> > extended (I see you mention time-extended but wouldn't time be implicit
> > based on the actual docs and thus we only need extended?)
>
> How about "smoothed?"
Agreed
"Smoothed" makes a lot of sense for me. We used to have a checkpoint
spike, now we don't.
Perhaps we should say something like "time extended checkpoints provide
smoother (transaction?) response times"
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: simon@2ndquadrant.com, david@fetter.org, jd@commandprompt.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] "distributed checkpoint"
In-Reply-To: <1197051730.4255.603.camel@ebony.site>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox