Re: Review of: pg_stat_statements with query tree normalization

From: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Review of: pg_stat_statements with query tree normalization
Date: 2012-01-17 01:06:02
Message-ID: CAAZKuFbgm_D3MXx3eef=V9wiHjyZ_0LCB_q2Hs2i7JqA0rqLKA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Well, short of seeing an acceptable patch for the larger thing, I don't
> want to accept a patch to add that field to Const, because I think it's
> a kluge.  I'm still feeling that there must be a better way ...

Hm. Maybe it is tractable to to find the position of the lexme
immediately after the Const? Outside of the possible loss of
whitespace (is that a big deal? I'm not sure) that could do the
trick...after all, the entire lexeme stream is annotated with the
beginning position, if memory serves, and that can be related in some
way to the end position of the previous lexeme, sort-of.

--
fdr

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Farina 2012-01-17 01:09:41 Re: Should we add crc32 in libpgport?
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2012-01-17 00:57:55 Re: Review of: pg_stat_statements with query tree normalization