Re: Multi-column distinctness.

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Multi-column distinctness.
Date: 2015-10-20 15:22:34
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYyEjNa+3rjKA2nK9tziwh-FvaVRpc7cmciz3Jv7n-wXQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Koyotaro's changes to force COLUMN to be required won't get through.
>>
>> ISTM that we could use COLLECT STATISTICS instead of ADD STATISTICS, and
>> use REMOVE STATISTICS instead of DROP STATISTICS. That way we can use
>> ALTER TABLE rather than inventing a new command. 5 minute change...
>
> That seems like a neat idea, actually. I'm not sure COLLECT is a good choice
> as it suggest the statistics is actually built, but that only happens during
> ANALYZE. But otherwise this seems to solve the issues with keywords and it's
> quite simple.

But ADD is no better there. I think ALTER TABLE .. COLLECT STATISTICS
isn't any worse than ALTER TABLE ... CLUSTER ON index_name. In both
cases, it means, when you do this operation, do it this way.

I would suggest that instead of DROP or REMOVE, the opposite should be
ALTER TABLE .. NO COLLECT STATISTICS.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2015-10-20 15:23:31 Re: ROWS FROM(): A Foolish (In)Consistency?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-10-20 15:16:13 Re: ROWS FROM(): A Foolish (In)Consistency?