Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ABAE650EC8 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:16:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 46496-09 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:16:03 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail136175.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail136175.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.136.175]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A29B650EA6 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:16:08 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail-c188.authsmtp.com (mail-c188.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.25]) by punt6.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id m5QEG6C6040422 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:16:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (85-211-229-155.dyn.gotadsl.co.uk [85.211.229.155]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/Kp) with ESMTP id m5QEG52J003996 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:16:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: get_relation_stats_hook() From: Simon Riggs To: pgsql-hackers Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:20:37 +0100 Message-Id: <1214490037.3845.136.camel@ebony.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Quench: 6a317819-438a-11dd-aecc-001871e930f4 X-AuthRoute: OCdxZQATClZOTQEd DAteCiNZVAwpPBRK HVkIKg5MOFUSTAAU Mk9RLVdJK3UEQkpF VCReGBUITgIzDi13 bRUrKFtCYEpOVxVr VUJIRFhSEUtgBAID Bx8AUBt7aQRDfWFy YERnQXAVAUEbADF4 QDRUFW4PbGEubmYc HkYJdAJTeAJDYxtG YgFiVXJZNXhWMykz WldrZmBuZDgOc3xb HhcCIE4lW0sPFyI9 QBY1BikmAVYyRyI0 LFxnQjU4 X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633235383639.cat.dmpriest.net.uk:1078/Kp X-Report-SPAM: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-Virus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system! X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200806/976 X-Sequence-Number: 120089 Currently we have a plugin capability for get_relation_info_hook(), but no corresponding capability for statistics info. So, all calls to SearchSysCache would be replaced with a call to get_relation_info_hook(), if present. Any objections, thoughts? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support