Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)
Date
Msg-id 22935.1332944726@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)  (Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> I merged upstream changes with the intention of providing a new patch
> for you to review. I found a problem that I'd guess was introduced by
> commit 9dbf2b7d75de5af38d087cbe2b1147dd0fd10f0a, "Restructure SELECT
> INTO's parsetree representation into CreateTableAsStmt". This has
> nothing to do with my patch in particular.

Yeah, I already deleted the intoClause chunk from the patch.  I think
treating SELECT INTO as a utility statement is probably fine, at least
for now.

> In the existing pg_stat_statements code in HEAD, there are 2
> pgss_store call sites - one in pgss_ProcessUtility, and the other in
> pgss_ExecutorFinish. There is an implicit assumption in the extant
> code (and my patch too) that there will be exactly one pgss_store call
> per query execution. However, that assumption appears to now fall
> down, as illustrated by the GDB session below. What's more, our new
> hook is called twice, which is arguably redundant.

That's been an issue right along for cases such as EXPLAIN and EXECUTE,
I believe.  Perhaps the right thing is to consider such executor calls
as nested statements --- that is, the ProcessUtility hook ought to
bump the nesting depth too.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marco Nenciarini
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Cross-backend signals and administration (Was: Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role)