Message-ID: <28ff49ef-46f8-0fb3-da67-ea903d3ef7e1@amazon.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 09:37:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.1.1
Subject: Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
CC: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Melanie Plageman
	<melanieplageman@gmail.com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
	Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
	"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers
	<pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
References: <20220404041516.cctrvpadhuriawlq@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20220405030506.lfdhbu5zf4tzdpux@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20220406030008.2qxipjxo776dwnqs@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <CAM-w4HN=4ss5dS2DH6Cof=zocJXeGOjRNKxEGgUZdJPMndyNzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAKRu_Z18jYbarKA4GZMOO00KtUqKtBqgQ8SgB=wSvSqKq3iiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1736122.1658333315@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAM-w4HOxaO6iJ94bGt1A65PRgX_b4gGSmb4mdzakZ1QhvGW=jA@mail.gmail.com>
 <83D73EC0-E3ED-4C98-A528-5E122278D553@anarazel.de>
 <CAM-w4HMhHAxjpXNVMZ5WhULHpd3+LuP27zaSKSFnzZeRwHZTjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <caa515eb-e9e7-9fe7-ceb1-a96b6f3787ce@amazon.com>
 <20220809164046.33vxhj6eeel2q3tq@awork3.anarazel.de>
Content-Language: en-US
From: "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot@amazon.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220809164046.33vxhj6eeel2q3tq@awork3.anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/28ff49ef-46f8-0fb3-da67-ea903d3ef7e1%40amazon.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 8/9/22 6:40 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-08-09 12:18:47 +0200, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
>> What do you think about adding a function in core PG to provide such
>> functionality? (means being able to retrieve all the stats (+ eventually add
>> some filtering) without the need to connect to each database).
> I'm not that convinced by the use case, but I think it's also low cost to add
> and maintain, so if somebody cares enough to write something...

Ack.

>
> The only thing I would "request" is that such a function requires more
> permissions than the default accessors do. I think it's a minor problem that
> we allow so much access within a database right now, regardless of object
> permissions, but it'd not be a great idea to expand that to other databases,
> in bulk?

Agree that special attention would need to be pay around permissions.

Something like allow its usage if member of pg_read_all_stats?

Regards,

-- 

Bertrand Drouvot
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com