Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions

From: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Pavel Trukhanov <pavel(dot)trukhanov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Date: 2023-02-02 15:05:54
Message-ID: 20230202150554.dwxhvw23epcskppb@ddolgov.remote.csb
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 03:07:27PM +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> This appears to have massive conflicts. Would you please rebase?

Sure, I was already mentally preparing myself to do so in the view of
recent changes in query jumbling. Will post soon.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2023-02-02 15:18:07 Re: Progress report of CREATE INDEX for nested partitioned tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-02-02 15:04:10 Re: pg_dump versus hash partitioning