Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nathan Bossart
Subject Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Date
Msg-id 20231013163730.GA1362765@nathanxps13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 09:02:56PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:46:11PM -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Also, it seems counterintuitive that queries with fewer than 10
>> constants are not merged.
> 
> Why? What would be your intuition using this feature?

For the "powers" setting, I would've expected queries with 0-9 constants to
be merged.  Then 10-99, 100-999, 1000-9999, etc.  I suppose there might be
an argument for separating 0 from 1-9, too.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: BRIN minmax multi - incorrect distance for infinite timestamp/date
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance degradation on concurrent COPY into a single relation in PG16.