Re: WAL-logging facility for pgstats kinds

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL-logging facility for pgstats kinds
Date: 2025-02-12 00:50:54
Message-ID: Z6vwbi3BY7mzSoPo@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:43:30AM -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> Because I saw this being moved to the new CF: I continue to *strenuously*
> object to this design. As outlined upthread, I think it's going into the
> completely wrong direction.

Right. FWIW, I'm not sure that we can absolutely just discard a
possiblity like what this patch is doing, but I see your point that it
may not fit into the final picture, depending on what we finish with.
I'll go discard that for now, keeping it aside in case.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2025-02-12 00:59:21 Re: Allow io_combine_limit up to 1MB
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-02-12 00:08:00 Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query