Hi
ne 30. 12. 2018 v 6:51 odesílatel Michael Paquier
napsal:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 02:40:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > Attached is the set of tests I used which has some regression tests.
> > The results won't fail with HEAD at 4203842a, and will generate some
> > diffs after e0ef13
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 02:40:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Attached is the set of tests I used which has some regression tests.
> The results won't fail with HEAD at 4203842a, and will generate some
> diffs after e0ef136d as Pavel's patch has changed the generated
> output.
And of course t
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 04:50:11PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Okay, that makes sense, now I got your point. Perhaps somebody else
> has an opinion to offer or has an objection with the proposed change?
And committed this one, after playing more with the instrumentation
callbacks and checking
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 07:57:45AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> There is only one difference - the plugin routine stmt_begin and stmt_end
> is called for line 3. Nothing less, nothing more.
Thanks for the detailed explanation! With your simple example it is
easy enough to see the difference, and
pá 28. 12. 2018 v 3:26 odesílatel Michael Paquier
napsal:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 07:02:04AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > is called two times, what is not expected, if you don't know some about
> > this inconsistency.
> >
> > So it is reason, why I don't think so current behave is correct. O
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 07:02:04AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> is called two times, what is not expected, if you don't know some about
> this inconsistency.
>
> So it is reason, why I don't think so current behave is correct. On second
> hand, the impact is very small - only few extensions uses
st 26. 12. 2018 v 6:09 odesílatel Michael Paquier
napsal:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 07:04:50AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > I can imagine some tracking extension, that will do some
> > initializations on plpgsql_stmt_block statement hook - but the most
> > important will not be called ever.
>
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 07:04:50AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> I can imagine some tracking extension, that will do some
> initializations on plpgsql_stmt_block statement hook - but the most
> important will not be called ever.
I was just studying this stuff and reviewing this patch with fresh
ey
st 19. 12. 2018 v 6:45 odesílatel Michael Paquier
napsal:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 10:33:38AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > Now, the statement's hook is not called for every plpgsql_stmt_block
> > statement. It is not big issue, but it is not consistent - and this
> > inconsistency should be r
On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 10:33:38AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Now, the statement's hook is not called for every plpgsql_stmt_block
> statement. It is not big issue, but it is not consistent - and this
> inconsistency should be repaired inside extension. Better to be consistent
> and every plpgsq
po 19. 11. 2018 v 19:37 odesílatel Pavel Stehule
napsal:
> Hi
>
> I am playing with plpgsql profiling and and plpgsql plugin API. I found so
> callback stmt_beg and stmt_end was not called for top statement due direct
> call exec_stmt_block function.
>
> <-->estate.err_text = NULL;
> <-->estate.e
Hi
I am playing with plpgsql profiling and and plpgsql plugin API. I found so
callback stmt_beg and stmt_end was not called for top statement due direct
call exec_stmt_block function.
<-->estate.err_text = NULL;
<-->estate.err_stmt = (PLpgSQL_stmt *) (func->action);
<-->rc = exec_stmt_block(&esta
12 matches
Mail list logo
