public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
To: Dmitry Dolgov <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcos Pegoraro <[email protected]>
Cc: vignesh C <[email protected]>
Cc: Sergei Kornilov <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <[email protected]>
Cc: David Steele <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Stark <[email protected]>
Cc: Pavel Trukhanov <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2023 10:30:25 +0900
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 06:08:41PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> Here is the rebased version. To adapt to the latest changes, I've marked
> ArrayExpr with custom_query_jumble to implement this functionality, but
> tried to make the actual merge logic relatively independent. Otherwise,
> everything is the same.

I was quickly looking at this patch, so these are rough impressions.

+   bool        merged;         /* whether or not the location was marked as
+                                  not contributing to jumble */

This part of the patch is a bit disturbing..  We have node attributes
to track if portions of a node should be ignored or have a location
marked, still this "merged" flag is used as an extension to track if a
location should be done or not.  Is that a concept that had better be
controlled via a new node attribute?

+--
+-- Consts merging
+--
+CREATE TABLE test_merge (id int, data int);
+-- IN queries
+-- No merging

Would it be better to split this set of tests into a new file?  FWIW,
I have a patch in baking process that refactors a bit the whole,
before being able to extend it so as we have more coverage for
normalized utility queries, as of now the query strings stored by
pg_stat_statements don't reflect that even if the jumbling computation
marks the location of the Const nodes included in utility statements
(partition bounds, queries of COPY, etc.).  I should be able to send
that tomorrow, and my guess that you could take advantage of that
even for this thread.
--
Michael


Attachments:

  [application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (833B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
  download

view thread (12+ 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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* 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