Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 690EA7591C6 for ; Thu, 24 May 2012 11:19:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SXYsw-0001Bl-0w for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 14:19:27 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q4OEJAkn019345; Thu, 24 May 2012 10:19:10 -0400 (EDT) To: Magnus Hagander cc: Thom Brown , pgsql-docs Subject: Re: track_activity_query_size note In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Magnus Hagander message dated "Thu, 24 May 2012 15:03:56 +0200" Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 10:19:10 -0400 Message-ID: <19344.1337869150@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201205/33 X-Sequence-Number: 7358 Magnus Hagander writes: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Thom Brown wrote: >>> I attach a proposed change to the docs which points out that if the >>> size of track_activity_query_size is changed and the is server >>> restarted, it won't have any effect if query statistics are already >>> present. > Ah, suddenly it makes sense. > And in that case yes, the docs changes should go under > pg_stat_statements, I believe. But surely the statement is flat out wrong; or if it's not wrong, there's a bug somewhere. We do not absorb the value of track_activity_query_size from the stats file. regards, tom lane