Tom Lane writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > I don't really get the point of the SHOW STATISTICS command. There is
> > already a command whose purpose is to retrieve data in tabular form,
> > namely SELECT.
> I presume we need not worry about that, since the SQL committee are
> certainly not going to standardize something that's only there for
> DBs that don't support information_schema.
> Actually, the idea of standardizing anything at all in this area seems
> pretty bogus. The events that are interesting to measure are below the
> semantic level of the standard --- for instance, how are you going to
> count index searches, when the standard doesn't even recognize the
> existence of indexes? Let alone things like buffer cache hits, which is
> a concept that might not exist at all in some implementations. I think
> we can safely assume that the proposed standardization effort will go
> nowhere, and just look at whether this is interesting for Postgres.
Thanks for the feedback. I do agree, and sorry for any
confusion, the SHOW syntax was not meant for standardization at the
SQL level. We will keep your other remarks in mind as we proceed.
John Murtari Software Workshop Inc.
jmurtari(at)thebook(dot)com "software that fits!" (TM)
(315) 944-0999 (x-211) http://www.SoftwareWorkshop.com/
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2009-11-01 02:04:12|
|Subject: Re: per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost|
|Previous:||From: John Murtari||Date: 2009-10-31 22:47:32|
|Subject: Re: Patch set under development to add usage reporting.|