Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId forpg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId forpg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
Date
Msg-id 20191113031523.GD14545@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId forpg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activityview?
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 05:37:30PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > The thing is that pg_stat_statements assigns a 0 queryid in the
> > post_parse_analyze_hook to recognize utility statements and avoid
> > tracking instrumentation twice in case of utility statements, and then
> > compute a queryid base on a hash of the query text.  Maybe we could
> > instead fully reserve queryid "2" for utility statements (so forcing
> > queryid "1" for standard queries if jumbling returns 0 *or* 2 instead
> > of only 0), and use "2" as the identifier for utility statement
> > instead of "0"?
> 
> Hmm.  Not sure.  At this stage it would be nice to gather more input
> on the matter, and FWIW, I don't like much the assumption that a query
> ID of 0 is perhaps a utility statement, or perhaps nothing depending
> on the state of a backend entry, or even perhaps something else
> depending how on how modules make use and define such query IDs.

I thought each extension would export a function to compute the query
id, and you would all that function with the pg_stat_activity.query
string.

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

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Invisible PROMPT2
Next
From: "Smith, Peter"
Date:
Subject: RE: Proposal: Add more compile-time asserts to exposeinconsistencies.