Re: Revisiting pg_stat_statements and IN() (Was: Re: pg_stat_statements fingerprinting logic and ArrayExpr)
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Revisiting pg_stat_statements and IN() (Was: Re: pg_stat_statements fingerprinting logic and ArrayExpr) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5655113B.6090406@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Revisiting pg_stat_statements and IN() (Was: Re: pg_stat_statements fingerprinting logic and ArrayExpr) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Revisiting pg_stat_statements and IN() (Was: Re:
pg_stat_statements fingerprinting logic and ArrayExpr)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/24/15 1:29 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > So I suspect the real problem here is that we might want all of these > things to look identical to pg_stat_statements: > > ARRAY[$1, $2, 42] > ARRAY[$1, $2, $3, 47] > '{1,2,3,47}'::int[] > > Don't see a very clean way to do that ... Another not-uncommon case is IN ( '1', '2', ... , '2342' ); in other words, treating an integer as text. A lot of frameworks like to do that and just push the problem onto the database. I'm not sure what pg_stat_statements would ultimately see in that case.. Since there's a few different things people might want, maybe a good first step is to allow extending/changing the jumbling decision at the C level. That would make it easy for a knowledgeable enough person to come up with an alternative as a plugin that regular users could use. -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: