| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk(at)zsrv(dot)org>, "imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, legrand legrand <legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |
| Date: | 2021-07-25 22:46:53 |
| Message-ID: | 6766.1627253213@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 7/25/21 12:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So AFAICS this test is inherently unstable and there is no code bug
>> to be fixed. We could drop the "plans" column from this query, or
>> print something approximate like "plans > 0 AND plans <= calls".
>> Thoughts?
> Is that likely to tell us anything very useful?
The variant suggested downthread ("plans >= 2 AND plans <= calls" for the
PREPARE entry only) seems like it's still reasonably useful. At least it
can verify that a replan has occurred and been counted.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2021-07-26 01:20:23 | Re: logical replication empty transactions |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2021-07-25 22:25:42 | Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store) |