Why does this patch #ifdef out the _PG_fini code in pg_stat_statements? Where you check for INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE return codes in pgss_ProcessUtility, I think this deserves a comment explaining that these could occur as a result of EXECUTE. It wasn't obvious to me, anyway.
It seems to me that the current hook placement does not address this complaint >> 1. The placement of the hook. Why is it three lines down in >> ProcessUtility? It's probably reasonable to have the Assert first, >> but I don't see why the hook function should have the ability to >> editorialize on the behavior of everything about ProcessUtility >> *except* the read-only-xact check. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
