Re: Multiple Query IDs for a rewritten parse tree

From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Andrey V(dot) Lepikhov" <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Multiple Query IDs for a rewritten parse tree
Date: 2022-01-10 08:56:58
Message-ID: Ydv02rKq2pL9ONcn@jrouhaud
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:37:34PM +0500, Andrey V. Lepikhov wrote:
> I think, pg_stat_statements can live with an queryId generator of the
> sr_plan extension. But It replaces all constants with $XXX parameter at the
> query string. In our extension user defines which plan is optimal and which
> constants can be used as parameters in the plan.

I don't know the details of that extension, but I think that it should work as
long as you have the constants information in the jumble state, whatever the
resulting normalized query string is right?

> One drawback I see here - creating or dropping of my extension changes
> behavior of pg_stat_statements that leads to distortion of the DB load
> profile. Also, we haven't guarantees, that another extension will work
> correctly (or in optimal way) with such queryId.

But then, if generating 2 queryid is a better for performance, does the
extension really need an additional jumble state and/or normalized query
string?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrey Borodin 2022-01-10 09:10:47 Re: reporting TID/table with corruption error
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2022-01-10 08:53:48 Re: SQL:2011 application time