| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |
| Date: | 2023-04-05 04:58:51 |
| Message-ID: | ZC0AC7L35HZbK82p@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 04:07:21AM +0000, Imseih (AWS), Sami wrote:
>> - es_processed: number of tuples processed during one ExecutorRun()
>> call.
>> - es_total_processed: total number of tuples aggregated across all
>> ExecutorRun() calls.
>
> I thought hard about this point and for some reason I did not want to
> mention ExecutorRun in the comment. But, I agree with what you suggest.
> It's more clear as to the intention of the fields.
>
> Attached is v5 addressing the comments.
Thanks, this should be enough to persist the number of tuples tracked
across multiple ExecutorRun() calls. This looks pretty good to me.
We should do something about providing more control over that to
libpq in the long run, IMO, and have more test coverage, but let's see
about that in 17~.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Koshi Shibagaki (Fujitsu) | 2023-04-05 05:27:48 | Fix code comment in postgres_fdw.c |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-04-05 04:57:32 | Re: what should install-world do when docs are not available? |