| From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
| Date: | 2024-04-01 18:53:43 |
| Message-ID: | CADkLM=f+29F1csUZ=7ic0dPwQgV2C1NJycb8A-rk8GQkxC=Jwg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Ah, yeah, you could change the function to have more parameters,
> given the assumption that all calls will be named-parameter style.
> I still suggest that my proposal is more robust for the case where
> the dump lists parameters that the receiving system doesn't have.
>
So what's the behavior when the user fails to supply a parameter that is
currently NOT NULL checked (example: avg_witdth)? Is that a WARN-and-exit?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-04-01 19:17:55 | Re: Security lessons from liblzma |
| Previous Message | Corey Huinker | 2024-04-01 18:49:44 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |