Re: New function pg_stat_statements_reset_query() to reset statistics of a specific query

On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:12 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:56 PM Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> >> Sure, but what are we going to achieve with that number? What
> >> >> information user is going to get by that? If it can help us to
> ensure
> >> >> that it has reset the expected number of statements, then I can see
> >> >> the clear usage, but without that, the return value doesn't seem to
> >> >> have any clear purpose. So, I don't see much value in breaking
> >> >> compatibility.
> >> >>
> >> >> Does anyone else have an opinion on this matter?
> >> >
> >> > This was proposed by Sergei Kornilov in
> >> > https://postgr.es/m/3368121530260059@web21g.yandex.ru saying that "it
> >> > would be nice" to return it. Maybe he has an use case in mind? I don't
> >> > see one myself.
> >> No, i have no specific usecase for this. Silently remove all matching
> rows and return void is ok for me. But i still think LOG ereport is not
> useful.
> >
> >
> > I would much prefer it to be a return code rather than a forced LOG
> message. Log message spam is very much a thing, and things that are logged
> as LOG will always be there.
> >
>
> Is any such LOG message present in the latest patch? I agree that the
> return code might be better, but there doesn't exist any such (LOG)
> thing. I see that it can be helpful for some users if we have any
> such return code, but don't know if it doesn't already exist, why that
> should be a requirement for this patch? Do you have any strong
> opinion about introducing return code with this patch?
>

I thought that returning the affected number of statements with the change
of adding new parameters to the reset function will be helpful to find out
how many statements are affected?

I can revert it back to void, if I am the only one interested with that
change.

Regards,
Haribabu Kommi
Fujitsu Australia