Re: Stats for inheritance trees

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> It's probably also worth noting that the reason I used DISTINCT
>> originally is because it's already a keyword.
>
> True.
>
> It occurs to me that the pg_stats view already exposes "n_distinct"
> as a column name.  I wouldn't object to using "n_distinct" and
> "n_distinct_inherited" or some such.

OK. So we have:

1. distinct and inherited_distinct, or
2. n_distinct and n_distinct_inherited

Any other votes/thoughts/opinions/color commentary?

...Robert