Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE

From: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE
Date: 2019-01-20 00:15:55
Message-ID: 875zuk6vb6.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

> Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
>> I propose that it should not ignore rowMarks, per the attached patch or
>> something similar.

Tom> +1 for not ignoring rowMarks, but this patch seems like a hack to
Tom> me. Why didn't you just add RowMarkClause as one of the known
Tom> alternative expression node types?

Because it's not an expression and nothing anywhere else in the backend
treats it as such?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Meskes 2019-01-20 00:23:07 Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-01-20 00:10:59 Re: Thread-unsafe coding in ecpg