public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Julien Rouhaud <[email protected]>
To: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Lukas Fittl <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Marko M <[email protected]>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:50:47 +0800
Message-ID: <Z6wal4gWT4NW6sJv@jrouhaud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA5RZ0t19ourU6_dVZ7yLsDkbJ4Bu5iAKHfsb8TVrR2pg-92vg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAA5RZ0sfRbd1xcq_oHNA0TPr57yM8qkg-GoD6A0nUfyxZhs33Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAP53PkxocbNr+eRag3FEJp3-7S1U80FspOg8UQjO902TWMG=6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA5RZ0u6yJdFL=p5vdpbZFS-2YY+Z6vtzmt4gejgZa3RcNiWMQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA5RZ0t80hP2aTv97QtEJy39GkxKmDBVDiTBApfiuTa4O=TEWQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<Z6v3dSJ7yEJ9xai4@jrouhaud>
	<[email protected]>
	<Z6wF_eCtCjav3hrQ@jrouhaud>
	<CAA5RZ0t19ourU6_dVZ7yLsDkbJ4Bu5iAKHfsb8TVrR2pg-92vg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 08:57:46PM -0600, Sami Imseih wrote:
> > Of course some people may want to keep the current behavior, if they have
> > limited number of temp tables or similar, so I had a GUC for that.  I don't
> > think that the community would really welcome such GUC for core-postgres,
> > especially since it wouldn't be pg_stat_statements specific.
>
> FWIW, I think options to tweak queryId computation is something
> that should be in core. It was discussed earlier in the context
> of IN list merging; the patch for this currently has the guc
> for the feature in pg_stat_statements, but there was a discussion
> about actually moving this to core [1] Giving the user a way
> to control certain behavior about the queryId computation
> is a good thing to do in core; especially queryId is no longer
> just consumed in pg_stat_statements. Maybe the right answer
> is an enum GUC, not sure yet.
>
> Specifically for the use-case you mention, using names vs OIDs in
> queryId computation is a valid use case for more than temporary tables,
> I can also think of upgrade, dump/restore, logical replication cases which
> can then allow for a consistent queryId.

Well, the ability for extensions to override the actual queryid calculation was
the result of more than half a decade of strong disagreements about it.   And
I'm definitely not volunteering to reopen that topic :)






view thread (34+ 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]
  Subject: Re: [PATCH] Optionally record Plan IDs to track plan changes for a query
  In-Reply-To: <Z6wal4gWT4NW6sJv@jrouhaud>

* 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