Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] select statement against pg_stats returns

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>,Shelby Cain <alyandon(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] select statement against pg_stats returns
Date: 2004-02-25 04:07:20
Message-ID: 403C1F78.9070308@familyhealth.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
> I don't think so --- we weren't trying to use it as an actual column
> datatype back then.
> 
> 7.4 has a problem though :-( ... this is one of the "damn I wish we'd
> caught that before release" ones, since it can't easily be fixed without
> initdb.  Reminds me that I need to get to work on making pg_upgrade
> viable again.

Has anyone given any thought as to whether dumping and restoring 
pg_statistic is worthwhile?

eg. some sort of ALTER TABLE..SET STATISTICS (1.0, 3.3, 'asdf',....) 
command?

Chris


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-25 04:15:26
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] select statement against pg_stats returns inconsistent data
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-25 04:07:15
Subject: Re: bgwriter never dies

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Humble GeekDate: 2004-02-25 04:11:37
Subject: PLSQL Question regarding multiple inserts
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-02-25 03:35:04
Subject: Re: select statement against pg_stats returns inconsistent data

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group