On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I see this is marked as ready for committer. Where does it stand in
> relation to the other long-running thread about "calls under-estimation
> propagation"? I was surprised to find that there isn't any CommitFest
> entry linked to that thread, so I'm wondering if that proposal is
> abandoned or what. If it's not, is committing this going to blow up
> that patch?
I believe that proposal was withdrawn. I think the conclusion there
was that we should just expose queryid and be done with it. In a way,
exposing the queryid enabled this work, because it provides an
identifier that can be used instead of sending large query texts each
call.
> BTW, I'm also thinking that the "detected_version" kluge is about ready
> to collapse of its own weight, or at least is clearly going to break in
> future. What we need to do is embed the API version in the C name of the
> pg_stat_statements function instead.
I agree that it isn't scalable.
--
Peter Geoghegan
