From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_stat_user_functions' notion of user |
Date: | 2010-08-05 14:13:58 |
Message-ID: | 20100805141358.GB11611@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
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.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-08-05 14:14:06 | Re: Synchronous replication |
Previous Message | Richard | 2010-08-05 14:13:29 | Re: Online backup cause boot failure, anyone know why? |