Re: pgstat SRF? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Decibel!
Subject Re: pgstat SRF?
Date
Msg-id EF0537CE-26E5-489A-9AC0-3A58E1DBE9B8@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to pgstat SRF?  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Apr 21, 2008, at 8:34 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:

> While looking over the statistics-for-functions patch
> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2008-03/msg00300.php), I
> came back to a thought I've had before - why do we keep one function
> per column for pgstat functions, instead of using a set returning
> function? Is there some actual reason for this, or is it just legacy
> from a time when it was (much) harder to write SRFs?
>
> If there's no actual reason, I think it would be a good idea to  
> make at
> least new views added based on SRFs instead....

+1. I could probably use this for pgstats at some point.
-- 
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect  decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: CommitFest Wiki page annoyance
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: MERGE Specification