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

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:53 PM Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.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.

It could also be made to take a parameter saying log yes/no with a default
value, but that seems like possible overengineering of a fairly simple
functionality.

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>