Hi,
On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 06:12:05PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 03:51:33PM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> >
> > I'm also unsure of how are extensions supposed to cooperate in general, as
> > I feel that queryids should be implemented for some "intent" (like monitoring,
> > planning optimization...). That being said I'm not sure if e.g. AQO heuristics
> > are too specific for its need or if it could be shared with other extension
> > that might be dealing with similar concerns.
>
> Assuming there are multiple providers and consumers of queryIds, every
> such consumer extension needs to know which type of queryId it wants to
> use. E.g. in case of pg_stat_statements, it needs to be somehow
> configured to know which of those kinds to take, to preserve
> extensibility you're talking about. Does the answer make sense, or did
> you mean something else?
I guess, but I don't think that the proposed approach does that.
The DBA should be able to configure a monitoring queryid provider, a planning
queryid provider... and the extensions should have a way to know which is
which. And also I don't think that the DBA should be allowed to setup multiple
monitoring queryid providers, nor change them dynamically.
> Btw, the approach in this thread still doesn't give a clue what to do
> when an extension needs to reuse some parts of core queryId generator,
> as in case with pg_stat_statements and "IN" condition merging.
Indeed, as the query text normalization is not extensible.
