public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Christoph Berg <[email protected]>
Cc: Lukas Fittl <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: ma lz <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: query_id: jumble names of temp tables for better pg_stat_statement UX
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 19:24:20 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0t4XQ_SANiJ5VfuoKnAuxMaY2ggQWoGKkHo+U2H+Sh-Sw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0uNofEXfEfNw3uRN3D3oXkFPQ_s+huLLHMKR_+MCk8RPQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAP53PkzAPrHNHquT76mVjfStrz0B2hKhF+CbAZ_w9QJUJ_1oJQ@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAA5RZ0sy8gZzK0qNScY-C_jOpqQb6Y3EQaXHu0Ti9pon-4jJBg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
Michael Paquier <[email protected]> writes:
> [ v6-0001-Add-custom-query-jumble-function-for-RangeTblEntr.patch ]
Couple of minor review comments ...
* In 5ac462e2b, this bit:
# node type
- if (($t =~ /^(\w+)\*$/ or $t =~ /^struct\s+(\w+)\*$/)
+ if ($query_jumble_custom)
+ {
+ # Custom function that applies to one field of a node.
+ print $jff "\tJUMBLE_CUSTOM($n, $f);\n";
+ }
+ elsif (($t =~ /^(\w+)\*$/ or $t =~ /^struct\s+(\w+)\*$/)
fails to honor $query_jumble_ignore as the other if-branches do.
Perhaps it's unlikely that a node would have both query_jumble_custom
and query_jumble_ignore annotations, but still, the script would emit
completely incorrect code if it did. Also, the "# node type" comment
should probably be moved down to within the first "elsif" block.
* In the v6 patch, this doesn't read very smoothly:
+ * Expanded reference names. This uses a custom query jumble function so
+ * as the table name is included in the computation, not its list of
+ * columns.
Perhaps better
+ * Expanded reference names. This uses a custom query jumble function so
+ * that the table name is included in the computation, but not its list of
+ * columns.
* Also, here:
+ considered the same. However, if the alias for a table is different
+ for semantically similar queries, these queries will be considered
+ distinct.
I'd change "semantically similar queries" to "otherwise-similar
queries"; I think writing "semantically" will just confuse people.
Otherwise LGTM.
regards, tom lane
view thread (19+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: query_id: jumble names of temp tables for better pg_stat_statement UX
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox