Hi, On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 11:18:07AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 05:51:08PM -0800, Lukas Fittl wrote: > > Is there a reason we feel that "strategy ring" is the better choice? > > If we wanted to make it more clear that its a ring buffer used as part > > of a buffer access strategy maybe we can do "strategy ring buffer"? > > (or "strategic ring buffer"?) > > It's used in the glossary of the documentation on HEAD, at least. I'd > tend to agree that "Buffer Access Strategy ring" would be a more > complete term when not in the context of the glossary page. If the > BAS are explicitely described, like in the glossary, "strategy ring" > reads fine.
That makes sense to me. I'll keep "strategy ring" in the glossary and change the pg_stat_io wording to "Buffer Access Strategy ring" in v5. Regards, -- Bertrand Drouvot PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
