From: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Jeremy Schneider <schnjere(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "Imseih (AWS), Sami" <simseih(at)amazon(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Query Jumbling for CALL and SET utility statements |
Date: | 2022-09-16 15:47:40 |
Message-ID: | 706ee610-4297-453b-f6f2-1e79161414f6@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 9/16/22 2:53 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>
>
>> Attached v5 to normalize 2PC commands too, so that we get things like:
>
> + case T_VariableSetStmt:
> + {
> + VariableSetStmt *stmt = (VariableSetStmt *) node;
> +
> + /* stmt->name is NULL for RESET ALL */
> + if (stmt->name)
> + {
> + APP_JUMB_STRING(stmt->name);
> + JumbleExpr(jstate, (Node *) stmt->args);
>
> With the patch, "SET ... TO DEFAULT" and "RESET ..." are counted as the
> same query.
> Is this intentional?
Thanks for looking at the patch!
No, it is not intentional, good catch!
> Which might be ok because their behavior is
> basically the same.
> But I'm afaid which may cause users to be confused. For example, they
> may fail to
> find the pgss entry for RESET command they ran and just wonder why the
> command was
> not recorded. To avoid such confusion, how about appending stmt->kind to
> the jumble?
> Thought?
I think that's a good idea and will provide a new version taking care of
it (and also Sami's comments up-thread).
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2022-09-16 15:55:40 | Re: postgres_fdw hint messages |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-09-16 15:40:46 | clang 15 doesn't like our JIT code |