Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store)

>> I like the idea of adding a check for a non-zero queryId in the new
>> pgss_planner_hook() (zero queryid shouldn't be reserved for
>> utility_statements ?).

> Some assert hit later, I can say that it's not always true. For
> instance a CREATE TABLE AS won't run parse analysis for the underlying
> query, as this has already been done for the original statement, but
> will still call the planner. I'll change pgss_planner_hook to ignore
> such cases, as pgss_store would otherwise think that it's a utility
> statement. That'll probably incidentally fix the IVM incompatibility.

Today with or without test on parse->queryId != UINT64CONST(0),
CTAS is collected as a utility_statement without planning counter.
This seems to me respectig the rule, not sure that this needs any
new (risky) change to the actual (quite stable) patch.

--
Sent from: https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-hackers-f1928748.html