Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)
Date: 2012-03-13 19:52:45
Message-ID: 14734.1331668365@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I probably should have exposed the query_id directly in the
> pg_stat_statements view, perhaps as "query_hash".

FWIW, I think that's a pretty bad idea; the hash seems to me to be
strictly an internal matter. Given the sponginess of its definition
I don't really want it exposed to users.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2012-03-13 20:07:32 Re: Command Triggers, patch v11
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2012-03-13 19:48:37 Re: pg_upgrade and statistics