Re: Update comments in functions for statistics import in postgres_fdw.c

From: Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update comments in functions for statistics import in postgres_fdw.c
Date: 2026-11-10 10:04:34
Message-ID: CAPmGK16Z2otssRqXQXO7k2iAL=TZfu2A3usKLvQymU7dKn1=OQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 10, 2026 at 6:50 PM Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As I understand it, you are saying we need to separate the version
> parameter from statistical value parameters, but the comment for
> import_attribute_statistics says:
>
> * Import attribute statistics from NullableDatum inputs for all statistical
> * values.
> *
> * For now, the 'version' argument is ignored. In the future it can be used
> * to interpret older statistics properly.
>
> So IMU I think we are using the term "statistical value parameters" to
> include the version parameter. With that in mind, what I proposed is
> not that bad...

I mean the term "statistical values" includes a version value. Sorry.

Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2026-11-10 09:59:39 Re: Incorrect CONTEXT reported for errors from parallel apply worker in logical replication