Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Atsushi Torikoshi <atorik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tatsuro Yamada <tatsuro(dot)yamada(dot)tf(at)nttcom(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Evgeny Efimkin <efimkin(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
Date: 2021-03-31 13:06:43
Message-ID: 20210331130643.GA11608@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 11:25:32AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:36:38AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 01:02:00PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > On 2021-Mar-24, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > >
> > > > From e08c9d5fc86ba722844d97000798de868890aba3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > > From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
> > > > Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 17:43:23 -0400
> > > > Subject: [PATCH v20 2/3] Expose queryid in pg_stat_activity and
> > >
> > > > src/backend/executor/execMain.c | 9 ++
> > > > src/backend/executor/execParallel.c | 14 ++-
> > > > src/backend/executor/nodeGather.c | 3 +-
> > > > src/backend/executor/nodeGatherMerge.c | 4 +-
> > >
> > > Hmm...
> > >
> > > I find it odd that there's executor code that acquires the current query
> > > ID from pgstat, after having been put there by planner or ExecutorStart
> > > itself. Seems like a modularity violation. I wonder if it would make
> > > more sense to have the value maybe in struct EState (or perhaps there's
> > > a better place -- but I don't think they have a way to reach the
> > > QueryDesc anyhow), put there by ExecutorStart, so that places such as
> > > execParallel, nodeGather etc don't have to fetch it from pgstat but from
> > > EState.
> >
> > The current queryid is already available in the Estate, as the underlying
> > PlannedStmt contains it. The problem is that we want to display the top level
> > queryid, not the current query one, and the top level queryid is held in
> > pgstat.
>
> So is the current approach ok? If not I'm afraid that detecting and caching
> the top level queryid in the executor parts would lead to some code
> duplication.

I assume it is since Alvaro didn't reply. I am planning to apply this
soon.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2021-03-31 13:12:09 Re: UniqueKey on Partitioned table.
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2021-03-31 13:06:13 Re: pgbench - add pseudo-random permutation function