Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store)

From: Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, legrand legrand <legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store)
Date: 2020-03-25 17:17:59
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> WAL usage patch [1] increments this version to 1_4 instead of 1_8.
> I *guess* that's because previously this version was maintained
> independently from pg_stat_statements' version. For example,
> pg_stat_statements 1.4 seems to have used PGSS_V1_3.

As far as I remember, this was my proposed change in review a year ago.
I think that having a clear analogy between the extension version and the function name would be more clear than sequential numbering of PGSS_V with different extension versions.
For pgss 1.4 it was fine to use PGSS_V1_3, because there were no changes in pg_stat_statements_internal.
pg_stat_statements 1.3 will call pg_stat_statements_1_3
pg_stat_statements 1.4 - 1.7 will still call pg_stat_statements_1_3. In my opinion, this is the correct naming, since we did not need a new function.
but pg_stat_statements 1.8 will call pg_stat_statements_1_4. It's not confusing?

Well, no strong opinion.

regards, Sergei

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2020-03-25 18:09:38 Allow continuations in "pg_hba.conf" files
Previous Message Rafia Sabih 2020-03-25 17:04:12 Re: Columns correlation and adaptive query optimization