Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2020 11:01:59 -0700 (MST)
From: legrand legrand <legrand_legrand@hotmail.com>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <1578247319224-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOBaU_Z9AyNbsgXmdeQeRAknjqeRfeBEDT8F8Q35DFLQU37g3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <OSBPR01MB46163FDEF109B96C60A7989294770@OSBPR01MB4616.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAOBaU_bzrbAO2amK55AQF3=ivgX6YjOBzZ4bBiHKf_faLK5-Gg@mail.gmail.com>
 <OSBPR01MB46160534A6DF796D180FA88E94700@OSBPR01MB4616.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAOBaU_YKtC78KmEc_W98yz=BGKd3Lgx-q7D37_sTA9VdsW+xOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <OSBPR01MB461651369C5B06C4BAEDF4D3944F0@OSBPR01MB4616.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAOBaU_bZwSHVNVX_v3+_vqmrvAE0gcp6YczWS1kL74LUZ=fMgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <OSBPR01MB46160EE594D4C0261C0A4B7694490@OSBPR01MB4616.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAOBaU_bKDoMxEWLqJue8ZS-kamcwKS2zUROONjEtp_sHmbBegg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1578237055901-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
 <CAOBaU_Z9AyNbsgXmdeQeRAknjqeRfeBEDT8F8Q35DFLQU37g3A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Planning counters in pg_stat_statements (using pgss_store)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Julien Rouhaud wrote
> On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 4:11 PM legrand legrand
> &lt;

> legrand_legrand@

> &gt; wrote:
>>
>> Hi Julien,
>>
>> I would like to create a link with
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/

> 1577490124579-0.post@.nabble

>>
>> where we met an ASSET FAILURE because query text was not initialized ...
>>
>> The question raised is:
>>
>> - should query text be always provided
>> or
>> - if not how to deal that case (in pgss).
> 
> I'd think that since the query text was until now always provided,
> there's no reason why this patch should change that.  That being said,
> there has been other concerns raised wrt. temporary tables in the IVM
> patchset, so ISTM that there might be important architectural changes
> upcoming, so having to deal with this case in pgss is not rushed
> (especially since handling that in pgss would be trivial), and can
> help to catch issue with the query text pasing.

IVM revealed that ASSERT,
but IVM works fine with pg_stat_statements.track_planning = off.
There may be others parts of postgresql that would have workede fine as
well.

This means 2 things:
- there is a (litle) risk to meet other assert failures when using planning
counters in pgss,
- we have an easy workarround to fix it (disabling track_planning).

But I would have prefered this new feature to work the same way with or
without track_planning activated ;o(


--
Sent from: https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-hackers-f1928748.html