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

From Álvaro Herrera
Subject Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Date
Msg-id 202502140936.lni5gtrycnzf@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
List pgsql-hackers
On 2025-Feb-14, Julien Rouhaud wrote:

> Since the merging is a yes/no option (I think there used to be some discussions
> about having a threshold or some other fancy modes), maybe you could instead
> differentiate the merged version by have 2 constants rather than this "..." or
> something like that?

Maybe the representation can be "($1 /*, ... */)" so that it's obvious
that the array extends beyond the first element but is still
syntactically valid.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"In Europe they call me Niklaus Wirth; in the US they call me Nickel's worth.
 That's because in Europe they call me by name, and in the US by value!"



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stat_statements and "IN" conditions
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench without dbname worked differently with psql and pg_dump