Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7321.1447518891@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_stat_statements query jumbling question
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 2:03 AM, Julien Rouhaud > <julien.rouhaud@dalibo.com> wrote: >> I'm also rather sceptical about this change. > Hm. Thinking a bit about this patch, it presents the advantage to be > able to track the same queries easily across systems even if those > tables have been created with a different OID. That argument would only hold if *every* use of OIDs in the jumbles were replaced by names --- not only tables, but types, operators, functions, etc. I'm already concerned that the additional name lookups will cost a lot of performance, and I think adding so many more would probably be disastrous. > Also, isn't this patch actually broken if we rename relations and/or > its namespace? Well, it would mean that the query would no longer be considered "the same". You could argue either way whether that's good or bad. But yeah, this approach will break one set of use-cases to enable another set. On the whole, I think my vote is to reject this patch. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: