| From: | Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, 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>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
| Date: | 2021-01-18 07:18:32 |
| Message-ID: | 809a4d20-edcd-9c0f-c91f-aef13458cefd@nttcom.co.jp_1 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Julien,
On 2021/01/15 17:47, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Hello Yamada-san,
>
> I reviewed the patch and don't have specific complaints, it all looks good!
>
> I'm however thinking about the "requested" status. I'm wondering if it could
> lead to people think that an ANALYZE is scheduled and will happen soon.
> Maybe "defined" or "declared" might be less misleading, or even "waiting for
> analyze"?
Thanks for reviewing the patch.
Yeah, "waiting for analyze" was preferable but it was a little long to use on the columns. Unfortunately, I couldn't imagine a suitable term. Therefore,
I'm keeping it as is.
Regards,
Tatsuro Yamada
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuro Yamada | 2021-01-18 07:24:58 | Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-01-18 07:08:44 | Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend |