Re: Query ID Calculation Fix for DISTINCT / ORDER BY and LIMIT / OFFSET

From: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bykov Ivan <i(dot)bykov(at)modernsys(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query ID Calculation Fix for DISTINCT / ORDER BY and LIMIT / OFFSET
Date: 2025-03-10 15:49:21
Message-ID: CAA5RZ0t7BkpOzhSnqt1tqR7_DGLyQBCANQMt=28oHYr9-6LOJg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> It seems to me that if this fixes the issue, that the next similar one
> is already lurking in the shadows waiting to jump out on us.

Yes, this is true that there may be other cases, but I am not sure if
it's worth carrying all the
extra bytes in the jumble to deal with a few cases like this. This is
why I don't think Variant B
or tracking the offset is a thrilling idea. -1 for me.

--
Sami

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2025-03-10 16:07:05 Re: per backend WAL statistics
Previous Message Naga Appani 2025-03-10 15:43:54 [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring