| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavlo Golub <pavlo(dot)golub(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH v5] pg_stat_statements: Add last_execution_start column |
| Date: | 2026-06-10 21:22:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0suev=_vgHU6MozQBw_=W1uWHeDhMX1cx8BozQppZpW5g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> A DDL test is added to cover utility-statement paths. Not sure how it is
> different from a DML statement though.
This is because DDL will go through ProcessUtility hook. I don't think
pg_stat_statements should be calling GetCurrentStatementStartTimestamp()
as you have it in v5. We should be setting this the start timestamp in
PlannedStmt during the ProcessUtility hook ( same pattern as ExecutorStart ).
see [1].
> FWIW, I remain opposed to adding *any* additional thing under the spinlock. We
> first need to fix the design of pgss, then we can start discussing expanding
> it even further.
I do think having the execution start time is valuable, but I will do
agree that it should
wait until after the pg_stat_statements redesign is complete which is
being discussed
here [2].
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA5RZ0uLbF_zcu64-K50fepq20s7GEYCsnizVBhm6eMmsfSa7Q%40mail.gmail.com
[2] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAA5RZ0sQ%2BgDn-J85j1FzOdL1YjVYRegpmQpDiah1%3DREWZSZj%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com#52395851f3df4b02c9ecb3430a7bfc37
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-06-10 21:32:32 | Re: [PATCH v5] pg_stat_statements: Add last_execution_start column |
| Previous Message | Zsolt Parragi | 2026-06-10 21:21:10 | Re: [PATCH v5] pg_stat_statements: Add last_execution_start column |