Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20210408032704.GA7498@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view? (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021-Apr-07, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 10:38:08AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote: > > Thanks! And I agree with using query_id in the new field names while keeping > > queryid for pg_stat_statements to avoid unnecessary query breakage. > > I think we need more feedback from the group. Do people agree with the > idea above? The question is what to call: > > GUC compute_queryid > pg_stat_activity.queryid > pg_stat_statements.queryid > > using "queryid" or "query_id", and do they have to match? Seems a matter of personal preference. Mine is to have the underscore everywhere in backend code (where this is new), and let it without the underscore in pg_stat_statements to avoid breaking existing code. Seems to match what Julien is saying. -- Álvaro Herrera Valdivia, Chile "La libertad es como el dinero; el que no la sabe emplear la pierde" (Alvarez)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: