On Mon, Sep 22, 2025 at 1:41 PM Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Since other statistics counter names are camel cases I think it's > > better to follow that for the new counter. > > Makes sense, done with memoryLimitHits in v2 attached (that's the only change > as compared with v1). >
The memory_limit_hits doesn't go well with the other names in the view. Can we consider memory_exceeded_count? I find memory_exceeded_count (or memory_exceeds_count) more clear and matching with the existing counters. Also, how about keeping it immediately after slot_name in the view? Keeping it in the end after total_bytes seems out of place. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
