Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 16:53:59 +0800
From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
To: Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>
Cc: legrand legrand <legrand_legrand@hotmail.com>,
	"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements oddity with track = all
Message-ID: <20201203085359.GC8050@nol>
References: <20201202040516.GA43757@nol>
 <CANNMO+KrVxMTrzSJLkrkENQX7utVYo1SEyaW54N+Y-Zjew=wbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201202063241.GA51769@nol>
 <CANNMO++VRu2r17jqxBDFZF4++p+f4WE+VbvOPAQi_4BTwP4g=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201203010051.GA8050@nol>
 <1606983372910-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
 <1110111606984390@mail.yandex.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1110111606984390@mail.yandex.ru>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 11:40:22AM +0300, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> Hello
> 
> > To get an increase in the number of records that means that the same
> > statement
> > would appear at top level AND nested level. This seems a corner case with
> > very low
> > (neglectible) occurence rate.
> 
> +1
> I think splitting fields into plans_toplevel / plans_nested will be less convenient. And more code with higher chance of copypaste errors

As I mentioned in a previous message, I really have no idea if that would be a
corner case or not.  For instance with native partitioning, the odds to have
many different query executed both at top level and as a nested statement may
be quite higher.