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

Re: stats_block_level

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: stats_block_level
Date: 2007-07-31 19:47:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> Methinks it should be: stats_<something>, so that people find it in the
> >> same place as stats_query_string, which is still there.
> > Hum, but the order in postgresql.conf is arbitrary, right?
> I concur with Simon that it should have some relationship to
> stats_query_string.  However, stats_collection doesn't appeal to me
> because that sounds like it would subsume stats_query_string (it seems
> like a master control toggle, as stats_start_collector used to be).
> Maybe something like stats_count_events?

stats_enable_counters, or just stats_counters?

We should prefix it with "stats".  I understand the verb issue, but
putting the same prefix for the same module is more important ---
effectively it is stats.collection.  Someday we might even use dots so
we can have multiple levels of detail, e.g. stats.block.accumulate or
something like that.

  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-07-31 19:52:49
Subject: Re: feature suggestion
Previous:From: Rafael AzevedoDate: 2007-07-31 19:33:28
Subject: feature suggestion

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group