Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements
Date: 2012-10-03 18:04:04
Message-ID: 18167.1349287444@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com> writes:
> Instead, I think it makes sense to assign a number -- arbitrarily, but
> uniquely -- to the generation of a new row in pg_stat_statements, and,
> on the flip side, whenever a row is retired its number should be
> eliminated, practically, for-ever. This way re-introductions between
> two samplings of pg_stat_statements cannot be confused for a
> contiguously maintained statistic on a query.

This argument seems sensible to me. Is there any use-case where the
proposed counter wouldn't do what people wished to do with an exposed
hash value?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-10-03 18:54:27 Re: Hash id in pg_stat_statements
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2012-10-03 17:57:47 Re: do we EXEC_BACKEND on Mac OS X?