| From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrei Lepikhov <lepihov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai>, Ilia Evdokimov <ilya(dot)evdokimov(at)tantorlabs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: track generic and custom plans in pg_stat_statements |
| Date: | 2025-07-30 20:09:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0t-5LjHFsYML49Dg=gt97GJbMs1zVGi86YDmvsa4=oGFw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> So, analysing
> pg_s_s data, it would be beneficial to determine if a generic plan is
> effective or not.
Yes, this is the point of adding these statistics to pg_s_s.
> In practice, with this knowledge, we can access the CachedPlanSource of
> the corresponding PREPARED statement via an extension and override the
> decision made in 'auto' mode. Unfortunately, we cannot obtain a pointer
> to plan cache entries for plans prepared by the extended protocol, but
> this may be possible in the future.
>
> So, I meant that the source of the plan is one important characteristic,
> and the type (custom or generic) is another, independent characteristic
The concepts of custom and generic plan types are associated with plan caches,
so they cannot have a different source. right?
--
Sami
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-07-30 21:03:53 | Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source |
| Previous Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2025-07-30 20:04:14 | Re: pg_dump --with-* options |