Re: list of extended statistics on psql - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Subject | Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
Date | |
Msg-id | 5e0fb573-3c38-ee39-885c-bdc01f116335@enterprisedb.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: list of extended statistics on psql (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Responses |
RE: list of extended statistics on psql
Re: list of extended statistics on psql |
List | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/15/21 5:19 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote: > > > On 1/15/21 9:47 AM, Julien Rouhaud wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:22:05AM +0900, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: >>> Hi Tomas, >>> >>> On 2021/01/13 7:48, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: >>>> On 2021/01/12 20:08, Tomas Vondra wrote: >>>>> On 1/12/21 2:57 AM, Tatsuro Yamada wrote: >>>>>> 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> I updated the patch to add the explanation of the extended stats' statuses. >>> Please feel free to modify the patch to improve it more clearly. >>> >>> The attached files are: >>> 0001: Add psql \dx and the fixed document >>> 0002: Regression test for psql \dX >>> app-psql.html: Created by "make html" command (You can check the >>> explanation of the statuses easily, probably) >> >> Hello Yamada-san, >> >> I reviewed the patch and don't have specific complaints, it all looks good! >> >> I'm however thinking about the "requested" status. I'm wondering if it could >> lead to people think that an ANALYZE is scheduled and will happen soon. >> Maybe "defined" or "declared" might be less misleading, or even "waiting for >> analyze"? >> > > Well, the "defined" option is not great either, because it can be > interpreted as "NOT NULL" - that's why I proposed "requested". Not sure > about "declared" - I wouldn't use it in this context, but I'm not a > native speaker so maybe it's OK. > I've pushed this, keeping the "requested". If we decide that some other term is a better choice, we can tweak that later of course. Thanks Tatsuro-san for the patience! regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
pgsql-hackers by date: