On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:46 AM Julien Rouhaud <julien.rouh...@free.fr> wrote: > This patch is actually storing the queryid in PGPROC, not in > PgBackendStatus, thus the need for an atomic. I used PGPROC because > the value needs to be available in log_line_prefix() and spi.c, so > pgstat.c / PgBackendStatus didn't seem like the best interface in that > case. Is widening PGPROC is too expensive for this purpose?
I doubt it. However, I think that the fact that this patch adds 15 new calls to pg_atomic_write_u64(&MyProc->queryId, ...) is probably not a good sign. It seems like we ought to be able to centralize it better than that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
