public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Dmitry Dolgov <[email protected]>
To: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Greg Stark <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Trukhanov <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 17:04:32 +0100
Message-ID: <20201118160432.hyko73sqc2bf7nkj@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+q6zcWtUbT_Sxj0V6HY6EZ89uv5wuG5aefpe_9n0Jr3VwntFg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+q6zcWtUbT_Sxj0V6HY6EZ89uv5wuG5aefpe_9n0Jr3VwntFg@mail.gmail.com>

> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 06:19:02PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
>
> I would like to start another thread to follow up on [1], mostly to bump up the
> topic. Just to remind, it's about how pg_stat_statements jumbling ArrayExpr in
> queries like:
>
>     SELECT something FROM table WHERE col IN (1, 2, 3, ...)
>
> The current implementation produces different jumble hash for every different
> number of arguments for essentially the same query. Unfortunately a lot of ORMs
> like to generate these types of queries, which in turn leads to
> pg_stat_statements pollution. Ideally we want to prevent this and have only one
> record for such a query.
>
> As the result of [1] I've identified two highlighted approaches to improve this
> situation:
>
> * Reduce the generated ArrayExpr to an array Const immediately, in cases where
>   all the inputs are Consts.
>
> * Make repeating Const to contribute nothing to the resulting hash.
>
> I've tried to prototype both approaches to find out pros/cons and be more
> specific. Attached patches could not be considered a completed piece of work,
> but they seem to work, mostly pass the tests and demonstrate the point. I would
> like to get some high level input about them and ideally make it clear what is
> the preferred solution to continue with.

I've implemented the second approach mentioned above, this version was
tested on our test clusters for some time without visible issues. Will
create a CF item and would appreciate any feedback.

view thread (38+ 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]
  Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
  In-Reply-To: <20201118160432.hyko73sqc2bf7nkj@localhost>

* 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