Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
From: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>, Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>, yasuo.honda@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, smithpb2250@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, nathandbossart@gmail.com, stark.cfm@gmail.com, geidav.pg@gmail.com, marcos@f10.com.br, robertmhaas@gmail.com, david@pgmasters.net, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, pavel.trukhanov@gmail.com, Sutou Kouhei <kou@clear-code.com>
Date: 2025-03-17T08:28:33Z
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
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 at 13:42, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 12:07:44PM GMT, vignesh C wrote: > > > > I noticed that the feedback from Sami at [1] has not yet been > > addressed, I have changed the status to Waiting on Author, kindly > > address them and update the status to Needs review. > > [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA5RZ0vt29Om%2BtKFOcUNhXV%2BkKpNnj0yj6OFho3-wngcMHWnAQ%40mail.gmail.com > > I'm afraid there is a disagreement about this part of the feedback. I'm > not yet convinced about the idea suggested over there (treating mutable > functions in the same way as constants) and not planning to change > anything, at least not in the current version of the patch. @Sami Imseih Do you have any other suggestions to solve this? Others: Any thoughts on which way is better in this case? Regards, Vignesh