From: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: queryId constant squashing does not support prepared statements |
Date: | 2025-05-09 06:48:35 |
Message-ID: | CAEG8a3L0QFpXRMmZRbDMBbwfruzTJmdwWKuXzd_fb+572Twctw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 1:35 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 11:05:43AM +0800, Junwang Zhao wrote:
> > Why not a location and a length, it should be more natural, it
> > seems we use this convention in some existing nodes, like
> > RawStmt, InsertStmt etc.
>
> These are new concepts as of Postgres 18 (aka only on HEAD), chosen
> mainly to match with the internals of pg_stat_statements as far as I
> recall. Doing the same here would not hurt, but it may be better
> depending on the cases to rely on a start/end.
ISTM that for string manipulation, start_pos/length are more appropriate,
start/end are often better suited for iterator use, where start refers to the
first element and end marks the position one past the last element.
Just my opinion, I can live with either way though.
> I suspect that
> switching from one to the other should not change much the internal
> squashing logic.
Yeah, not much difference, one can easily be computed from the other.
> --
> Michael
--
Regards
Junwang Zhao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2025-05-09 06:58:42 | Re: Support for runtime parameters in injection points, for AIO tests |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2025-05-09 06:37:58 | Re: pgsql: Make cancel request keys longer |