Re: Ignore 2PC transaction GIDs in query jumbling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Ignore 2PC transaction GIDs in query jumbling
Date
Msg-id ZOBJdHWVoKhuYErB@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Ignore 2PC transaction GIDs in query jumbling  (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>)
Responses Re: Ignore 2PC transaction GIDs in query jumbling
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:31:03AM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> I don't have a particularly strong opinion on whether we should
> distinguish DEALLOCATE ALL from DEALLOCATE <stmt> (call it +0.5), but

The difference looks important to me, especially for monitoring.
And pgbouncer may also use both of them, actually?  (Somebody, please
correct me here if necessary.)

> this seems like a reasonable way to do it unless we want to invent a
> query_jumble_ignore_unless_null attribute (which seems like overkill for
> this one case).

I don't really want to have a NULL-based property for that :)
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade fails with in-place tablespace
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [17] Special search_path names "!pg_temp" and "!pg_catalog"