From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
In-reply-to: <270FBE56-4F83-4FDE-BFFC-18EFF54DE30A@yandex-team.ru>
References: <21247.1589296570@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <270FBE56-4F83-4FDE-BFFC-18EFF54DE30A@yandex-team.ru>
Comments: In-reply-to "Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
	message dated "Tue, 12 May 2020 22:51:23 +0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <31270.1589307094.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 14:11:34 -0400
Message-ID: <31271.1589307094@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> writes:
> 3. I think names observed in wait_event and wait_event_type should not d=
uplicate information. i.e. "XidGenLock" is already "LWLock".

Yeah, I'd been wondering about that too: we could strip the "Lock" suffix
from all the names in the LWLock category, and make pg_stat_activity
output a bit narrower.

There are a lot of other things that seem inconsistent, but I'm not sure
how much patience people would have for judgment-call renamings.  An
example is that "ProcSignalBarrier" is under IO, but why?  Shouldn't it
be reclassified as IPC?  Other than that, *almost* all the IO events
are named SomethingRead, SomethingWrite, or SomethingSync, which
makes sense to me ... should we insist they all follow that pattern?

Anyway, I was just throwing this idea out to see if there would be
howls of "you can't rename anything" anguish.  Since there haven't
been so far, I'll spend a bit more time and try to create a concrete
list of possible changes.

			regards, tom lane