Re: Add new option 'all' to pg_stat_reset_shared()

On 2023-11-13 13:15, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-11-12 16:46, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 01:15:50PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> The comments added could be better grammatically, but basically LGTM.
>>> I'll take care of that if there are no objections.
>> 
>> The documentation also needed a few tweaks (for DEFAULT and the
>> argument name), so I have fixed the whole and adapted the new part of
>> the docs to that, with few little tweaks.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> I assume you have already taken this into account, but I think we
> should add the same documentation to the below patch for
> pg_stat_reset_slru():
> 
> 
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALj2ACW4Fqc_m%2BOaavrOMEivZ5aBa24pVKvoXRTmuFECsNBfAg%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> On 2023-11-12 16:54, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 08:32:34PM +0900, torikoshia wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-10 13:18, Andres Freund wrote:
>>>> I see no reason to not include slrus. We should never have added the
>>>> ability to reset them individually, particularly not without a use
>>>> case - I couldn't find one skimming some discussion. And what's the
>>>> point in not allowing to reset them via pg_stat_reset_shared()?
>>> 
>>> When including SLRUs, do you think it's better to add 'slrus' 
>>> argument which
>>> enables pg_stat_reset_shared() to reset all SLRUs?
>> 
>> I understand that Andres says that he'd be OK with a addition of a
>> 'slru' option in pg_stat_reset_shared(), as well as including SLRUs in
>> the resets if everything should be wiped.
> 
> Thanks, I'll make the patch.

Attached patch.

BTW currently the documentation explains all the arguments of 
pg_stat_reset_shared() in one line and I feel it's a bit hard to read.
Attached patch uses <itemizedlist>.

What do you think?


-- 
Regards,

--
Atsushi Torikoshi
NTT DATA Group Corporation