Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
From: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
To: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Pavel Trukhanov <pavel.trukhanov@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-09-30T13:49:30Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Introduce squashing of constant lists in query jumbling
- 62d712ecfd94 18.0 landed
-
Make documentation builds reproducible
- b0f0a9432d0b 17.0 cited
-
Include values of A_Const nodes in query jumbling
- 9ba37b2cb6a1 16.0 cited
-
Teach planner about more monotonic window functions
- 456fa635a909 16.0 cited
-
Split up guc.c for better build speed and ease of maintenance.
- 0a20ff54f5e6 16.0 cited
Attachments
>On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 04:02:12PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > > I've prepared a new rebased version to deal with the new way of > > computing query id, but as always there is one tricky part. From what I > > understand, now an external module can provide custom implementation for > > query id computation algorithm. It seems natural to think this machinery > > could be used instead of patch in the thread, i.e. one could create a > > custom logic that will enable constants collapsing as needed, so that > > same queries with different number of constants in an array will be > > hashed into the same record. > > > > But there is a limitation in how such queries will be normalized > > afterwards — to reduce level of surprise it's necessary to display the > > fact that a certain query in fact had more constants that are showed in > > pgss record. Ideally LocationLen needs to carry some bits of information > > on what exactly could be skipped, and generate_normalized_query needs to > > understand that, both are not reachable for an external module with > > custom query id logic (without replicating significant part of the > > existing code). Hence, a new version of the patch. > > Forgot to mention a couple of people who already reviewed the patch. And now for something completely different, here is a new patch version. It contains a small fix for one problem we've found during testing (one path code was incorrectly assuming find_const_walker results).