Re: Improve docs for n_distinct_inherited
David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-10-13T11:55:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Monday, October 13, 2025, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 13 Oct 2025 at 17:09, David G. Johnston > <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > > How about: > > > > n_distinct_inherited exists to allow the distinct value estimate to be > overwritten for the children-included statistics gathered for inheritance > parent tables, and for partitioned tables. > > > > I can live with “ordinarily” with that wording, it is just the negative > of “children-included”. > > I've ended up reverting the text back to become more similar to how it > was but explicitly adding ", and for the statistics gathered for > partitioned tables.", since that's what the original bug report was > confused about. > > I've kept the other document changes as they were in the previous patch. > WFM. Since we allow 0 as an input I’m not convinced we should remove that sentence, though I concur that using reset is preferred. David J.