From: | torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query |
Date: | 2022-12-08 05:10:32 |
Message-ID: | c51098ac613f908776e5564a7c7a0e16@oss.nttdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-12-07 03:41, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch does not currently build, due to a conflicting oid:
>
> I suggest you choose a random oid out of the "development purposes"
> range:
Thanks for your advice!
Attached updated patch.
BTW, since this patch depends on ProcessInterrupts() and EXPLAIN codes
which is used in auto_explain, I'm feeling that the following discussion
also applies to this patch.
> --
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoYW_rSOW4JMQ9_0Df9PKQ%3DsQDOKUGA4Gc9D8w4wui8fSA%40mail.gmail.com
>
> explaining a query is a pretty
> complicated operation that involves catalog lookups and lots of
> complicated stuff, and I don't think that it would be safe to do all
> of that at any arbitrary point in the code where ProcessInterrupts()
> happened to fire.
If I can't come up with some workaround during the next Commitfest, I'm
going to withdraw this proposal.
--
Regards,
--
Atsushi Torikoshi
NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v25-0001-log-running-query-plan.patch | text/x-diff | 24.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Isaac Morland | 2022-12-08 05:12:05 | Re: add \dpS to psql |
Previous Message | Maciek Sakrejda | 2022-12-08 05:09:18 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) |