Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > > On 4/13/17 08:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > >> We have a bunch of > 3-character prefixes already: amop*, amproc*,
> > >> enum*, cast*. But I think I nevertheless like "ste" better.
> >
> > > "stx" perhaps?
> >
> > >
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
> > On 4/13/17 08:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> We have a bunch of > 3-character prefixes already: amop*, amproc*,
> >> enum*, cast*. But I think I nevertheless like "ste" better.
>
> > "stx" perhaps?
>
> > I would also be in favor of changing it
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 4/13/17 08:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> We have a bunch of > 3-character prefixes already: amop*, amproc*,
>> enum*, cast*. But I think I nevertheless like "ste" better.
> "stx" perhaps?
> I would also be in favor of changing it to something other than "sta".
On 4/13/17 08:37, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> We could go with "ste" perhaps, or break the convention of 3-character
>> prefixes and go with "stae".
> We have a bunch of > 3-character prefixes already: amop*, amproc*,
> enum*, cast*. But I think I nevertheless like "ste" better.
"stx" perhaps?
On 04/13/2017 03:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Tomas Vondra writes:
On 04/12/2017 03:36 PM, David Rowley wrote:
"stakind" seems like a better name. I'd have personally gone with
"statype" but pg_statistic already thinks stakind is better.
+1 to stakind
I agree with that, but as long as we're ret
Tomas Vondra writes:
> On 04/12/2017 03:36 PM, David Rowley wrote:
>> "stakind" seems like a better name. I'd have personally gone with
>> "statype" but pg_statistic already thinks stakind is better.
> +1 to stakind
I agree with that, but as long as we're rethinking column names here,
was it a g
On 04/12/2017 03:36 PM, David Rowley wrote:
"stakind" seems like a better name. I'd have personally gone with
"statype" but pg_statistic already thinks stakind is better.
+1 to stakind
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote D
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:36 AM, David Rowley
wrote:
> I'd been thinking that staenabled is not the most suitable column name
> for storing the types of statistics that are defined for the extended
> statistics.
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgre
I'd been thinking that staenabled is not the most suitable column name
for storing the types of statistics that are defined for the extended
statistics. For me, this indicates that something can be disabled,
but there's no syntax for that, and even if there was, if we were to
enable/disable the ki
