| From: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(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 08:10:46 |
| Message-ID: | wlmcmstjtfh2rdt5t5wevhhbwwpgo2qh4sjjw7wgauxqhdsk3d@3vct7w7qtewg |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 02:35:33PM GMT, Michael Paquier 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. I suspect that
> switching from one to the other should not change much the internal
> squashing logic.
Right, switching from start/length to start/end wouldn't change much for
squashing. I didn't have any strong reason to go with start/end from my
side, so if start/length is more aligned with other nodes, let's change
that.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2025-05-09 08:12:24 | Re: queryId constant squashing does not support prepared statements |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2025-05-09 07:24:57 | Re: disabled SSL log_like tests |