Re: pg_stat_statements: calls under-estimation propagation

On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Sameer Thakur <samthakur74(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Please find v10 of patch attached. This patch addresses following
>> review comments
>
> I've cleaned this up - revision attached - and marked it "ready for committer".
>
> I decided that queryid should be of type oid, not bigint. This is
> arguably a slight abuse of notation, but since ultimately Oids are
> just abstract object identifiers (so say the docs), but also because
> there is no other convenient, minimal way of representing unsigned
> 32-bit integers in the view that I'm aware of, I'm inclined to think
> that it's appropriate.

There seems to be no problem even if we use bigint as the type of
unsigned 32-bit integer like queryid. For example, txid_current()
returns the transaction ID, i.e., unsigned 32-bit integer, as bigint.
Could you tell me what the problem is when using bigint for queryid?

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao