Re: [GENERAL] Stats Collector

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I don't like SET for it --- SET is for setting state that will persist
> >> over some period of time, not for taking one-shot actions. We could
> >> perhaps use a function that checks that it's been called by the
> >> superuser.
>
> > Should we have RESET clear the counter, perhaps RESET STATCOLLECTOR?
> > I don't think we have other RESET variables that can't be SET, but I
> > don't see a problem with it.
>
> RESET is just a variant form of SET. It's not for one-shot actions
> either (and especially not for one-shot actions against state that's
> not accessible to SHOW or SET...)
>
> I still like the function-call approach better.

OK, so you are suggesting a function call, and a check in there to make
sure it is the superuser. Comments?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026