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: | 2021-01-12 22:48:20 |
Message-ID: | 85e7e1e7-c2f0-a4a0-61de-6e7ecaee44e3@nttcom.co.jp_1 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tomas,
On 2021/01/12 20:08, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
> On 1/12/21 2:57 AM, Tatsuro Yamada wrote:
>> Hi Tomas,
>>
>> 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.
Thanks,
Tatsuro Yamada
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ryan Lambert | 2021-01-12 23:14:13 | Re: WIP: System Versioned Temporal Table |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-01-12 22:37:56 | Re: pgbench and timestamps (bounced) |