Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRN_Mhyk0T+UUOec9ac7Vz8PwKDGEo8OTbRmGq-9b9WOA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to pg_stat_statements query jumbling question  (Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga@uptime.jp>)
Responses Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question  (Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga@uptime.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga@uptime.jp> wrote:
> Why don't we use relation name (with looking up the catalog)
> on query jumbling? For performance reason?

I think that there is a good case for preferring this behavior. While
it is a little confusing that pg_stat_statements does not change the
representative query string, renaming a table does not make it a
substantively different table.

There is, IIRC, one case where a string is jumbled directly (CTE
name). It's usually not the right thing, IMV.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Satoshi Nagayasu
Date:
Subject: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: perlcritic