Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query

From: Andrey Lepikhov <a(dot)lepikhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
To: torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
Cc: James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, 'Andres Freund' <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Ronan Dunklau <ronan(dot)dunklau(at)aiven(dot)io>, david(dot)christensen(at)crunchydata(dot)com, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
Date: 2023-09-25 09:49:18
Message-ID: c8322c0c-1f75-4e6b-ab91-b1469d1c778e@postgrespro.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 25/9/2023 14:21, torikoshia wrote:
> On 2023-09-20 14:39, Lepikhov Andrei wrote:
> Hmm, as a test, I made sure to call ProcessLogQueryPlanInterrupt() on
> all CFI using
> v28-0002-Testing-attempt-logging-plan-on-ever-CFI-call.patch, and then
> ran the following query but did not cause any problems.
>
> ```
> =# CREATE TABLE test();
> =# CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION ddl() RETURNS void AS $$
> BEGIN
>   EXECUTE format('ALTER TABLE test ADD COLUMN x integer;');
>   PERFORM pg_sleep(5);
> END; $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE;
> =# SELECT ddl();
> ```
>
> Is this the case you're worrying about?

I didn't find a problem either. I just feel uncomfortable if, at the
moment of interruption, we have a descriptor of another query than the
query have been executing and holding resources.

--
regards,
Andrey Lepikhov
Postgres Professional

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Borisov 2023-09-25 09:58:02 Re: Index range search optimization
Previous Message Andrey Lepikhov 2023-09-25 09:42:35 Re: POC: GUC option for skipping shared buffers in core dumps