Re: Stats for inheritance trees

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Stats for inheritance trees
Date: 2010-01-05 18:00:20
Message-ID: 12235.1262714420@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Another option would be to call it "inherits_ndistinct", or something
> like that, which seems a little more readable, but not great: I don't
> think there's going to be any getting around the need to RTFM before
> setting these parameters.

Well, the previously agreed-to syntax was SET STATISTICS DISTINCT.
I don't see a problem with using "distinct" and "inherited_distinct"
or something like that. "ndistinct" is probably not a good name to
expose to non-programmers.

The must-RTFM argument is fairly weak, though, since these are knobs
that only advanced users would twiddle anyway.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-01-05 18:09:46 Re: Stats for inheritance trees
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-01-05 17:52:28 Re: Stats for inheritance trees