On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 14:08 +0200, Erwin Brandstetter wrote: > On 07.07.2011 08:52, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 21:22 +0200, Erwin Brandstetter wrote: > >> Aloha! > >> > >> I have been observing irregularities in the function statistics for some > >> time. Now I have investigated and believe to have found the cause. > >> Everything is here, including a proposed fix: > >> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/ticket/325 > >> > > The fix you propose requires from us to write a patch for PostgreSQL > > (which won't be available to users before 9.2) for something we can > > already do right into pgAdmin. Instead of filtering with the name of the > > schema and the function, we should use its OID. This way, we could fix > > 1.12, and 1.14 really quickly. > > Yeah, that's even better. Makes the query simpler, too. > I was unsure whether funcid was known at the time of the query. >
Fixed. > I do wonder, however, why the function arguments, part of the function > signature, would not be included in pg_catalog.pg_stat_user_functions. > Would you think this is worthy of a suggestion to the postgres people? > Might be. They could reply that you already have this information from the pg_proc catalog. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
