Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] log_statement output for protocol - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] log_statement output for protocol
Date
Msg-id 200608290222.k7T2MXW01278@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] log_statement output for protocol  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-jdbc
BTom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > Yes, I do.  I have applied the attached patch to fix this issue and
> > several others.  The fix was to save the bind parameters in the portal,
> > and display those in the executor output, if available.
>
> I have a feeling you just blew away the 4% savings in psql I've spent
> the evening on.  What's the overhead of this patch?

The only overhead I see is calling log_after_parse() all the time,
rather than only when log_statement is all.  I could fix it by checking
log_statement and log_min_duration_statement >= 0.  Does
log_after_parse() look heavy to you?

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] log_statement output for protocol
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] log_statement output for protocol