From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: legrand legrand <legrand_legrand@hotmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: explain plans with information about (modified) gucs
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 17:16:55 -0500
Message-ID: <24065.1545085015@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1edcee55-ea96-d123-199d-4c5f1fc5003b@2ndquadrant.com>
References: <e1791b4c-df9c-be02-edc5-7c8874944be0@2ndquadrant.com>
<10561.1544800904@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<c1282df1-43a8-0854-dfee-790d7dd9c93a@2ndquadrant.com>
<631ae5c8-5581-6c5e-382c-2dcdb2e5c956@2ndquadrant.com>
<1545083780942-0.post@n3.nabble.com>
<1edcee55-ea96-d123-199d-4c5f1fc5003b@2ndquadrant.com>
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 12/17/18 10:56 PM, legrand legrand wrote:
>> what would you think about adding
>> search_path
>> to that list ?
> Yeah, I've been thinking about that too. Currently it gets filtered out
> because it's in the CLIENT_CONN_STATEMENT group, but the code only
> includes QUERY_TUNING_*.
> But we don't want to include everything from CLIENT_CONN_STATEMENT,
> because that would include various kinds of timeouts, vacuuming
> parameters, etc.
> And the same issue applies to work_mem, which is in RESOURCES_MEM. And
> of course, there's a lot of unrelated stuff in RESOURCES_MEM.
> So I guess we'll need to enable QUERY_TUNING_* and then selectively a
> couple of individual options from other groups.
This is putting way too much policy into the mechanism, if you ask me.
At least for the auto_explain use case, it'd make far more sense for
the user to be able to specify which GUCs he wants the query space
to be divided according to. While it's possible to imagine giving
auto_explain a control setting that's a list of GUC names, I'm not
sure how we adapt the idea for other use-cases. But the direction
you're headed here will mostly ensure that nobody is happy.
regards, tom lane
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: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com, legrand_legrand@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: explain plans with information about (modified) gucs
In-Reply-To: <24065.1545085015@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox