Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jM9t6-0003pI-Mt for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:33:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jM9t5-0002RZ-3v for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:32:59 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jM9t4-0002RS-TK for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:32:58 +0000 Received: from n3.nabble.com ([162.255.23.22]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jM9t1-0007YT-Mw for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:32:57 +0000 Received: from n3.nabble.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n3.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16A421C5C0536 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2020 05:32:54 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 05:32:54 -0700 (MST) From: legrand legrand To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Message-ID: <1586349174047-0.post@n3.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <5c9e0ca4-c378-57aa-1b08-49c83a41d5ec@oss.nttdata.com> References: <20200331060307.e7kypfynz7jous62@nol> <20200331073321.bhnx2p63gp5px37f@nol> <20200331184217.tf3x534uz4vusgmp@nol> <13923268-bad9-80f9-2542-5fd5e8b8c500@oss.nttdata.com> <1585857868967-0.post@n3.nabble.com> <20200403072628.GB95652@nol> <5c9e0ca4-c378-57aa-1b08-49c83a41d5ec@oss.nttdata.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 List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Fujii Masao-4 wrote > On 2020/04/03 16:26 > [...] >> >> "Note that planning and execution statistics are updated only at their >> respective end phase, and only for successful operations. >> For example the execution counters of a long running query >> will only be updated at the execution end, without showing any progress >> report before that. > > Probably since this is not the example for explaining the relationship of > planning and execution stats, it's better to explain this separately or > just > drop it? > > What about the attached patch based on your proposals? +1 Your patch is perfect ;^> Regards PAscal -- Sent from: https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-hackers-f1928748.html