On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 11:44:44AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> writes: > > Does anyone object to this patch? I'm thinking to commit it separetely > > at first before committing the planning_counter_in_pg_stat_statements > > patch. > > I took a quick look through v9-0001-Pass-query-string-to-the-planner.patch > and it's fine by me. It also matches up with something I've wanted to > do for awhile, which is to make the query string available during > planning and execution so that we can produce error cursors for > run-time errors, when relevant. > > (It's a little weird that the patch doesn't make standard_planner > actually *do* anything with the string, like say save it into > the PlannerInfo struct. But that can come later I guess.) > > Note that I wouldn't want to bet that all of these call sites always have > non-null query strings to pass; but probably most of the time they will.
Surprinsingly, the whole regression tests pass flawlessly with an non-null query string assert, but we did had some discussion about it. The pending IVM patch would break that assumption, same as some non trivial extensions like citus (see https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAFMSG9HJQr%3DH8doWJOp%3DwqyKbVqxMLkk_Qu2KfpmkKvS-Xn7qQ%40mail.gmail.com#ab8ea541b8c8464f7b52ba6d8d480b7d and later), so we didn't make it a hard requirement.
