Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements

From: Andrei Zubkov <zubkov(at)moonset(dot)ru>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements
Date: 2022-04-04 06:59:04
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Julien,

Thank you very much for your work on this patch!

On Mon, 2022-04-04 at 10:31 +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> - the commit message:
> It should probably mention the mimnax_stats_since at the beginning. 
> Also, both
> the view and the function contain those new field.
> Minor rephrasing:
> s/evicted and returned back/evicted and stored again/?
> s/with except of all/with the exception of all/
> s/is now returns/now returns/

Agreed, commit message updated.

> - code:
> +#define SINGLE_ENTRY_RESET() \
> +if (entry) { \
> [...]
> It's not great to rely on caller context too much.

Yes, I was thinking about it. But using 4 parameters seemed strange to

>   I think it would be better
> to pass at least the entry as a parameter (maybe e?) to the macro for
> more
> clarity.  I'm fine with keeping minmax_only, stats_reset and
> num_remove as is.

Using an entry as a macro parameter looks good, I'm fine with "e".

> Apart from that I think this is ready!

v13 attached
regards, Andrei

Attachment Content-Type Size
v13-0001-pg_stat_statements-Track-statement-entry-timestamp.patch text/x-patch 63.3 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2022-04-04 07:20:00 Re: unlogged sequences
Previous Message Noah Misch 2022-04-04 06:26:20 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side