Re: pg_stat_user_functions' notion of user

On tor, 2010-08-05 at 07:13 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 04:58:32PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > pg_stat_user_functions has an inconsistent notion of what "user" is.
> > Whereas the other pg_stat_user_* views filter out non-user objects
> > by schema, pg_stat_user_functions checks for language "internal",
> > which does not successfully exclude builtin functions of language
> > SQL. Is there a reason for this inconsistency?
>
> If I had to hazard a guess, it would be that the functionality was
> written over time by different people, not all of whom were using the
> same criteria for coherence.

Would anyone object to changing it to make it more consistent with other
others? And since we're jollily making catalog changes in 9.0 still,
could this also be backpatched?