On Thu, 2023-08-24 at 18:23 +0200, Matthias van de Meent wrote: > On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 15:13, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 19 Jul 2023, 13:58 Laurenz Albe, <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote: > > > I agree that the name "max_local_update" could be improved. > > > Perhaps "avoid_hot_above_size_mb". > > > > Or "hot_table_size_threshold" or "hot_update_limit"? > > Although I like these names, it doesn't quite cover the use of the > parameter for me, as updated tuples prefer to be inserted on the same > page as the old tuple regardless of whether HOT applies. > > How about 'local_update_limit'?
I agree with your concern. I cannot think of a better name than yours. Yours, Laurenz Albe
