Re: Generate pg_stat_get_* functions with Macros - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 05:16:56PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Doing that in a separate patch is fine by me.

I have applied the patch for the tab entries, then could not resist
poking at the parts for the db entries.  This leads to more reduction
than the other one actually, as of:
 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 447 deletions(-)

Like the previous one, the functions have the same names and the field
names are updated to fit in the picture.  Thoughts?
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Error-safe user functions
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Add index scan progress to pg_stat_progress_vacuum