Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query

From: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Marko M <marko(at)pganalyze(dot)com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query
Date: 2025-02-13 16:44:33
Message-ID: CAA5RZ0vnAdfJjAQQjxYLjS-zrkXBjwRrT=+uSFP7YPtWioErig@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I don't understand why we would change any naming here at all. I think
> you should be looking at a much broader consensus and plus-ones that a
> renaming is needed. -1 from me.

The reason for the change is because "query jumble" will no longer
make sense if the jumble code can now be used for other types of
trees, such as Plan.

I do agree that this needs a single-threaded discussion to achieve a
consensus.

--

Sami

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Dolgov 2025-02-13 16:50:09 Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Previous Message Pavel Borisov 2025-02-13 16:39:32 Re: Get rid of WALBufMappingLock