Re: pg_stat_user_functions' notion of user

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On tor, 2010-08-05 at 07:13 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 04:58:32PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> pg_stat_user_functions has an inconsistent notion of what "user" is.
>>> Whereas the other pg_stat_user_* views filter out non-user objects
>>> by schema, pg_stat_user_functions checks for language "internal",
>>> which does not successfully exclude builtin functions of language
>>> SQL. Is there a reason for this inconsistency?

> Would anyone object to changing it to make it more consistent with other
> others? And since we're jollily making catalog changes in 9.0 still,
> could this also be backpatched?

The reason for the inconsistency is that the underlying behavior is
different: fmgr automatically doesn't collect stats for internal
functions. And yes I will object to trying to change that right now.
It's not just a "catalog change".

regards, tom lane