Re: list of extended statistics on psql

From: Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: list of extended statistics on psql
Date: 2021-01-18 07:18:32
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Julien,

On 2021/01/15 17:47, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Hello Yamada-san,
> I reviewed the patch and don't have specific complaints, it all looks good!
> I'm however thinking about the "requested" status. I'm wondering if it could
> lead to people think that an ANALYZE is scheduled and will happen soon.
> Maybe "defined" or "declared" might be less misleading, or even "waiting for
> analyze"?

Thanks for reviewing the patch.
Yeah, "waiting for analyze" was preferable but it was a little long to use on the columns. Unfortunately, I couldn't imagine a suitable term. Therefore,
I'm keeping it as is.

Tatsuro Yamada

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuro Yamada 2021-01-18 07:24:58 Re: list of extended statistics on psql
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2021-01-18 07:08:44 Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend