On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 01:56:43PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
> On 2020/03/29 15:15, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 03:42:50PM +0100, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 2:01 PM Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > > > So what I'd like to say is that the information that users are interested
> > > > in would vary on each situation and case. At least for me it seems
> > > > enough for pgss to report only the basic information. Then users
> > > > can calculate to get the numbers (like total_time) they're interested in,
> > > > from those basic information.
> > > >
> > > > But of course, I'd like to hear more opinions about this...
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Unless someone chime in by tomorrow, I'll just drop the sum as it
> > > seems less controversial and not a blocker in userland if users are
> > > interested.
> >
> > Done in attached v11, with also the s/querytext/query_text/ discrepancy noted
> > previously.
>
> Thanks for updating the patch! But I still think query_string is better
> name because it's used in other several places, for the sake of consistency.
You're absolutely right. That's what I actually wanted to do given your
previous comment, but somehow managed to miss it, sorry about that and thanks
for fixing.
> So I changed the argument name that way and commit the 0001 patch.
> If you think query_text is better, let's keep discussing this topic!
>
> Anyway many thanks for your great job!
Thanks a lot!
>
> > > > > I also exported BufferUsageAccumDiff as mentioned previously, as it seems
> > > > > clearner and will avoid future useless code churn, and run pgindent.
> > > >
> > > > Many thanks!! I'm thinking to commit this part separately.
> > > > So I made that patch based on your patch. Attached.
> > >
> > > Thanks! It looks good to me.
> >
> > I also kept that part in a distinct commit for convenience.
>
> I also pushed 0002 patch. Thanks!
>
> I will review 0003 patch again.
And thanks for that too :)