From: | Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
Date: | 2021-01-13 01:22:05 |
Message-ID: | 79d3a4c5-1efe-5b9e-c06e-3a907b531013@nttcom.co.jp_1 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tomas,
On 2021/01/13 7:48, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
> On 2021/01/12 20:08, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 1/12/21 2:57 AM, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
>>> On 2021/01/09 9:01, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> ...>
>>>> While working on that, I realized that 'defined' might be a bit
>>>> ambiguous, I initially thought it means 'NOT NULL' (which it does not).
>>>> I propose to change it to 'requested' instead. Tatsuro, do you agree, or
>>>> do you think 'defined' is better?
>>>
>>> Regarding the status of extended stats, I think the followings:
>>>
>>> - "defined": it shows the extended stats defined only. We can't know
>>> whether it needs to analyze or not. I agree this name was
>>> ambiguous. Therefore we should replace it with a more suitable
>>> name.
>>> - "requested": it shows the extended stats needs something. Of course,
>>> we know it needs to ANALYZE because we can create the patch.
>>> However, I feel there is a little ambiguity for DBA.
>>> To solve this, it would be better to write an explanation of
>>> the status in the document. For example,
>>>
>>> ======
>>> The column of the kind of extended stats (e. g. Ndistinct) shows some statuses.
>>> "requested" means that it needs to gather data by ANALYZE. "built" means ANALYZE
>>> was finished, and the planner can use it. NULL means that it doesn't exists.
>>> ======
>>>
>>> What do you think? :-D
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that seems reasonable to me. Will you provide an updated patch?
>
>
> Sounds good. I'll send the updated patch today.
I updated the patch to add the explanation of the extended stats' statuses.
Please feel free to modify the patch to improve it more clearly.
The attached files are:
0001: Add psql \dx and the fixed document
0002: Regression test for psql \dX
app-psql.html: Created by "make html" command (You can check the
explanation of the statuses easily, probably)
Thanks,
Tatsuro Yamada
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-psql-dX-list-extended-statistics-objects-20210113.patch | text/plain | 10.2 KB |
0002-regression-test-for-psql-dX-20210113.patch | text/plain | 9.8 KB |
app-psql.html | text/html | 206.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-01-13 01:35:14 | Re: Fix a typo in SearchCatCache function comment |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2021-01-13 01:09:19 | Re: WIP: BRIN multi-range indexes |