I don't agree.
If we already had a column with the execution plan in the
pg_stat_statements then
it would be a workaround for the problem with the ambiguous names in the
query text column.
But we don't have such column, and I don't want to create a dependency
on the unimplemented feature.
I rat
I like it. I don't want to break backward compatibility.
The new column could be named like query_qn, and will have here the
unambitious text of the query
where all the objects names are extended to the qualified names.
Sergei Agalakov
On 11/27/2018 2:17 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
On 2018-Nov-
On 2018-Nov-27, legrand legrand wrote:
> There are also some tryies to extend pg_stat_statements
> with plans see
> https://www.postgresql-archive.org/FEATURE-PATCH-pg-stat-statements-with-plans-td5940964.html
Thread at
http://postgr.es/m/9e43fd8f-4d35-4b9d-545c-f9011cd4a...@uni-muenster.de
-
On 2018-Nov-27, Sergei Agalakov wrote:
> We do see that the queries are different but we can't see why they are so
> much different in the execution time.
> If the pg_stat_statements module would extend the object name to the
> qualified names like s1.t1 and s2.t2 then we would see the report as
>
A part of the answer would be to store
explain (verbose on) select count(*) from t1;
result in pg_stat_statements for the corresponding query...
(Verbose On) gives the "qualified names":
QUERY PLAN
---
Aggregate (cost=19.38..19.39 rows=1 width=8)
Output: c
Hi,
It would help to analyze performance issues if pg_stat_statements would
extend the object names to the qualified names.
Currently if we have two schemas ( say s1 and s2) with the objects with
the same name ( say tables t1) then
after the next executions:
set schema 's1';
select count(*) fr
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 04:08:09PM +0300, Amine Tengilimoglu wrote:
> Hi;
>
> What is the best way for upgrading standby server on postgresql? I dont
> want
> to use --link option for master upgrading that is why it seems just one way
> for achive this..this way is setup sr again...
The
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 11:30:18AM +1100, rob stone wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 15:17 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 04:27:35PM +1100, rob stone wrote:
> > > Logged in as user postgres and postgres owns the files created by
> > > initdb, so is this a permissions
