On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Anyway, I agree with Jeff that this terminology shouldn't creep into > function and structure member names.
Okay. > I don't really like the term "memory pool" either. We're growing a > bunch of little special-purpose allocators all over the code base > because of palloc's somewhat dubious performance and memory usage > characteristics, but if any of those are referred to as memory pools > it has thus far escaped my notice. It's a widely accepted term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_pool But, sure, I'm not attached to it. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
