Re: pgstat SRF?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgstat SRF?
Date: 2008-04-21 14:05:54
Message-ID: 10560.1208786754@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> While looking over the statistics-for-functions patch
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00300.php), I
> came back to a thought I've had before - why do we keep one function
> per column for pgstat functions, instead of using a set returning
> function? Is there some actual reason for this, or is it just legacy
> from a time when it was (much) harder to write SRFs?

I think it's so that you can build your own stats views instead of being
compelled to select the data someone thought was good for you.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • pgstat SRF? at 2008-04-21 13:34:23 from Magnus Hagander

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2008-04-21 14:06:54 Re: TODO, FAQs to Wiki?
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2008-04-21 14:02:07 Re: TODO, FAQs to Wiki?