On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> A more important point is that it would be a nontrivial change, both as >> to code and documentation, and it's too late for such in 9.0. So what >> we ought to be confining the discussion to right now is what 9.0 should >> print here. > > It's exactly as nontrivial as the proposed change in the other direction.
I think it's non-triviality lies in the user-visible effects. Ie, we won't have a release cycle of experience with the change ourselves to see if we really like the new behaviour and can live with it. I'm not sure where I stand myself as I find the averaging quite confusing myself. I'm not sure how confusing it would be to change though. The total i/o done is likely to be something you want to compare with some other metric like output from iostat or knowledge of how much bandwidth your i/o system can provide so it does seem like totals are relevant. I think I'm leaning -- slightly -- towards calling out the discrepancy by naming it something like "Total Buffer Usage:". But I could be convinced otherwise. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
