From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: compute_query_id and pg_stat_statements |
Date: | 2021-05-11 09:41:06 |
Message-ID: | 20210511094106.tqocsdmoefvu5lpu@nol |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:59:51AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
> That doesn't fundamentally make it impossible, you just have to add it
> to the list of variables being copied over, wouldn't you? See
> save_backend_variables()
Yes, I agree, and that's what I meant by "explicitly handled". The thing is
that I don't know if that's the best way to go, as it doesn't solve the "is it
actually enabled" and/or "which implementation is used". At least the patch I
sent, although it's totally a hack, let you know if compute_query_id is enabled
or not. I'm fine with implementing it that way, but only if there's a
consensus.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiro Ikeda | 2021-05-11 09:46:21 | Re: wal stats questions |
Previous Message | tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com | 2021-05-11 09:33:05 | RE: Remove "FROM" in "DELETE FROM" when using tab-completion |