| From: | Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question |
| Date: | 2015-10-10 06:46:43 |
| Message-ID: | 5618B453.7030506@uptime.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015/10/03 6:18, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp> wrote:
>> I know this still needs to be discussed, but I would like to submit
>> a patch for further discussion at the next CF, 2015-11.
>
> I think I already expressed this in my explanation of the current
> behavior, but to be clear: -1 from me to this proposal.
I would like to introduce queryId to pgaudit and sql_firewall extensions
to determine query groups. queryId could be useful if available in those
modules.
I think users may want to do that based on object names, because they
issue queries with the object names, not the internal object ids.
Changing queryId after re-creating the same table may make the user
gets confused, because the query string the user issue is not changed.
At least, I would like to give some options to be chosen by the user.
Is it possible and/or reasonable?
Regards,
--
NAGAYASU Satoshi <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rajeev rastogi | 2015-10-10 10:12:32 | Dangling Client Backend Process |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2015-10-10 02:16:51 | Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #13611: test_postmaster_connection failed (Windows, listen_addresses = '0.0.0.0' or '::') |