Re: pg_stat_statements cluttered with "DEALLOCATE dbdpg_p*"

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements cluttered with "DEALLOCATE dbdpg_p*"
Date: 2014-07-20 12:45:37
Message-ID: 20140720124537.GE24864@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-07-20 14:43:27 +0200, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >a) Consider using the extended query protocol.
> >b) consider using unnamed prepared statements to reduce the number of
> > roundtrips
> >c) wonder why PREPARE/DEALLOCATE are so much more frequent than the
> > actualy query execution.
>
> (1) I'm not responsible for DBD::Pg allocating "random" names to prepared
> statements, even if the queries are the same, and that accumulate over time
> (weeks, possibly months).
>
> (2) pg_stat_statements is currently inconsistent anyway, as PREPARE is not
> counted (but the underlying query is on each EXECUTE), although its
> corresponding DEALLOCATE is counted, so I think that something is needed for
> consistency.

That's because PREPARE isn't executed as it's own statement, but done on
the protocol level (which will need noticeably fewer messages). There's
no builtin logic to ignore actual PREPARE statements. So I don't think
your consistency argument counts as much here.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2014-07-20 12:56:53 Re: tweaking NTUP_PER_BUCKET
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2014-07-20 12:43:27 Re: pg_stat_statements cluttered with "DEALLOCATE dbdpg_p*"