| From: | Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New function pg_stat_statements_reset_query() to reset statistics of a specific query |
| Date: | 2018-11-08 14:52:39 |
| Message-ID: | 84928391541688759@myt4-174696c9aa9d.qloud-c.yandex.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
>> Sure, but what are we going to achieve with that number? What
>> information user is going to get by that? If it can help us to ensure
>> that it has reset the expected number of statements, then I can see
>> the clear usage, but without that, the return value doesn't seem to
>> have any clear purpose. So, I don't see much value in breaking
>> compatibility.
>>
>> Does anyone else have an opinion on this matter?
>
> This was proposed by Sergei Kornilov in
> https://postgr.es/m/3368121530260059@web21g.yandex.ru saying that "it
> would be nice" to return it. Maybe he has an use case in mind? I don't
> see one myself.
No, i have no specific usecase for this. Silently remove all matching rows and return void is ok for me. But i still think LOG ereport is not useful.
regards, Sergei
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2018-11-08 14:59:09 | proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-11-08 14:33:27 | Re: [HACKERS] Surjective functional indexes |