Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query

From: torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
Date: 2022-12-08 05:10:32
Message-ID: c51098ac613f908776e5564a7c7a0e16@oss.nttdata.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2022-12-07 03:41, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch does not currently build, due to a conflicting oid:
>
> I suggest you choose a random oid out of the "development purposes"
> range:

Thanks for your advice!
Attached updated patch.

BTW, since this patch depends on ProcessInterrupts() and EXPLAIN codes
which is used in auto_explain, I'm feeling that the following discussion
also applies to this patch.

> --
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoYW_rSOW4JMQ9_0Df9PKQ%3DsQDOKUGA4Gc9D8w4wui8fSA%40mail.gmail.com
>
> explaining a query is a pretty
> complicated operation that involves catalog lookups and lots of
> complicated stuff, and I don't think that it would be safe to do all
> of that at any arbitrary point in the code where ProcessInterrupts()
> happened to fire.

If I can't come up with some workaround during the next Commitfest, I'm
going to withdraw this proposal.

--
Regards,

--
Atsushi Torikoshi
NTT DATA CORPORATION

Attachment Content-Type Size
v25-0001-log-running-query-plan.patch text/x-diff 24.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Isaac Morland 2022-12-08 05:12:05 Re: add \dpS to psql
Previous Message Maciek Sakrejda 2022-12-08 05:09:18 Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?)