Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats
Date: 2022-02-15 18:31:44
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZzHSx0UOAHRXWX04_NRC-xyjDrF+JJNZh72tesxyjknw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 12:46 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Only if either the user wants to drop all stats, or somehow knows the oids of
> already dropped tables...

If it's really true that we can end up storing data for dropped
objects, I think that's not acceptable and needs to be fixed.

I don't currently understand the other issues on this thread well
enough to have a clear opinion on them.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2022-02-15 18:37:58 Re: Avoid erroring out when unable to remove or parse logical rewrite files to save checkpoint work
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-02-15 18:26:41 Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats