Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbqRmfzvJbSVO9ORVzCA1tXmfWQvPdaqXpjHTrA8buJqw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v66  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday, April 6, 2022, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:


I'd go for
pgstat_reset_slru_counter() -> pgstat_reset_slru()
pgstat_reset_subscription_counter() -> pgstat_reset_subscription()
pgstat_reset_subscription_counters() -> pgstat_reset_all_subscriptions()
pgstat_reset_replslot_counter() -> pgstat_reset_replslot()
pgstat_reset_replslot_counters() -> pgstat_reset_all_replslots()

I like having the SQL function paired with a matching implementation in this scheme.
 

We could leave out the _all_ and just use plural too, but I think it's a bit
nicer with _all_ in there.

+1 to _all_
 

Not quite sure what to do with pgstat_reset_single_counter(). I'd either go
for the minimal pgstat_reset_single_counters() or pgstat_reset_one()?

Why not add both pgstat_resert_function() and pgstat_reset_table() (to keep the pairing) and they can call the renamed pgstat_reset_function_or_table() internally (since the function indeed handle both paths and we’ve yet to come up with a label to use instead of “function and table stats”)?

These are private functions right?

David J.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?