> -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Kings-Lynne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 July 2005 02:39 > To: Robert Treat > Cc: Bruce Momjian; Dave Page; Tom Lane; Dawid Kuroczko; > Andreas Pflug; PostgreSQL-patches; PostgreSQL-development > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Dbsize backend integration > > >>You are into the cycle we were in. We discussed pg_object size (too > >>vague) and pg_index_size (needs pg_toast_size too, and maybe toast > >>indexes; too many functions). > > > > Yeah, I read those discussions, and think you were better > off then than you > > are now, which is why I went back to it somewhat. > > To be honest, the amount of effort being expended on this naming > discussion far outweighs the benefits. Maybe it's time for a core > member to step in and just resolve it - one way or the other?
Agreed. The current names were discussed (at some length!) by Bruce & I before I reworked the latest version of the patch. Can we just settle on that? Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
