Re: Add starelid, attnum to pg_stats and leverage this in pg_dump

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 04:04:23PM -0400, Corey Huinker wrote:
>> I left the expr_attnum stuff out.  It seems to make this patch quite large
>> and complicated, we don't plan to use it for the pg_dump patch, and I'm not
>> sure about showing users a "synthetic attnum" that seems to have no other
>> point of reference.  Would this information be useful in pg_dump somewhere?
>> I'm curious to hear more about the intent.
> 
> expr_attnum was something that Michael Paquier had lamented that the view
> didn't have. There is obviously no present need for it, as pg_dump isn't
> being modified for extended stats at all.

Okay.  I think I'll continue to leave this one out for now.

>> I didn't see much value in adding attnum here given the size of the changes
>> to the expected output it produces.
> 
> Same reasons for putting that in - people had lamented that we couldn't
> order the dump by attnum, and ordering by attname feels weird somehow.
> Again, we don't presently need it.

This note was about adding attnum to the pg_stats_stable view in the test.
I don't have any problem with adding it to pg_stats.

-- 
nathan