From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Jeremy Schneider <schnjere(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Query Jumbling for CALL and SET utility statements |
Date: | 2022-10-07 04:18:26 |
Message-ID: | 20221007041826.56odjh3rf56dzfxx@jrouhaud |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 11:51:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> > While studying a bit more this thread, I've been reminded of the fact
> > that this would treat different flavors of BEGIN/COMMIT commands (mix
> > of upper/lower characters, etc.) as different entries in
> > pg_stat_statements, and it feels inconsistent to me that we'd begin
> > jumbling the 2PC and savepoint commands with their nodes but not do
> > that for the rest of the commands, even if, as mentioned upthread,
> > applications may not mix grammars.
>
> I've been thinking since the beginning of this thread that there
> was no coherent, defensible rationale being offered for jumbling
> some utility statements and not others.
Only a very small subset causes trouble in real life scenario, but I agree that
cherry-picking some utility statements isn't a great approach.
> I wonder if the answer is to jumble them all. We avoided that
> up to now because it would imply a ton of manual effort and
> future code maintenance ... but now that the backend/nodes/
> infrastructure is largely auto-generated, could we auto-generate
> the jumbling code?
That's a good idea. Naively, it seems doable as the infrastructure in
gen_node_support.pl already supports everything that should be needed (like
per-member annotation).
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2022-10-07 04:25:42 | Re: ExecRTCheckPerms() and many prunable partitions |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-10-07 04:13:05 | Re: Query Jumbling for CALL and SET utility statements |