Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vik Fearing
Subject Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE
Date
Msg-id 6baeefa1-18f2-2e85-3d4e-23ebf7402e10@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE  (Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 19/01/2019 15:43, Andrew Gierth wrote:
> pg_stat_statements considers a plain select and a select for update to
> be equivalent, which seems quite wrong to me as they will have very
> different performance characteristics due to locking.
> 
> The only comment about it in the code is:
> 
>     /* we ignore rowMarks */
> 
> I propose that it should not ignore rowMarks, per the attached patch or
> something similar.
> 
> (thanks to Vik Fearing for preliminary testing)

I don't this needs any documentation changes, but some tests would be
nice.  I will go add some.  Does the extension need a version bump for this?
-- 
Vik Fearing                                          +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Daniel Verite"
Date:
Subject: Re: Alternative to \copy in psql modelled after \g
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] REINDEX CONCURRENTLY 2.0