From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrei Zubkov <zubkov(at)moonset(dot)ru> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Tracking statements entry timestamp in pg_stat_statements |
Date: | 2022-04-04 08:08:34 |
Message-ID: | Ykqngj+ZGN35OMss@jrouhaud |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 09:59:04AM +0300, Andrei Zubkov wrote:
> > Minor rephrasing:
> >
> > s/evicted and returned back/evicted and stored again/?
> > s/with except of all/with the exception of all/
> > s/is now returns/now returns/
>
> Agreed, commit message updated.
>
> > - code:
> >
> > +#define SINGLE_ENTRY_RESET() \
> > +if (entry) { \
> > [...]
> >
> > It's not great to rely on caller context too much.
>
> Yes, I was thinking about it. But using 4 parameters seemed strange to
> me.
>
> > I think it would be better
> > to pass at least the entry as a parameter (maybe e?) to the macro for
> > more
> > clarity. I'm fine with keeping minmax_only, stats_reset and
> > num_remove as is.
>
> Using an entry as a macro parameter looks good, I'm fine with "e".
>
> > Apart from that I think this is ready!
>
> v13 attached
Thanks a lot! I'm happy with this version, so I'm marking it as Ready for
Committer.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrey V. Lepikhov | 2022-04-04 08:27:45 | Re: Removing unneeded self joins |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-04-04 07:20:00 | Re: unlogged sequences |