On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Euler Taveira <eu...@timbira.com.br> wrote: > 2018-06-20 4:30 GMT-03:00 Haribabu Kommi <kommi.harib...@gmail.com>: >> Attached is a simple patch with implementation. Comments? >> > Why don't you extend the existing function pg_stat_statements_reset()?
Well, the existing function doesn't take any arguments. We could add an additional version of it that takes an argument, or we could replace the existing version with one that has an optional argument. But are either of those things any better than just adding a new function with a different name, like pg_stat_statements_reset_statement()? I have not had such good experiences with function overloading, either in PostgreSQL or elsewhere, that I'm ready to say reusing the same name is definitely the right approach. For example, suppose we eventually end up with a function that resets all the statements, a function that resets just one statement, a function that resets all statements for one user, and a function that resets all statements where the statement text matches a certain regexp. If those all have separate names, everything is fine. If they all have the same name, there's no way that's not confusing. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
