On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 02:28:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 01:49:18PM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote:
> >> I would have expected both calls to be normalized and fingerprinted to one
> >> and the same queryId.
>
> > Agreed, and that's actually a known problem that is currently being worked on.
> > You can look at
> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/36e5bffe-e989-194f-85c8-06e7bc88e6f7%40amazon.com
> > for details about the discussion and in-progress fix.
>
> Um ... that seems unrelated. AFAICS the OP is complaining about
> the fact that '42'::int4::int8 is not identical to '42'::int8.
> Well, they're not. I seriously doubt that we would or should
> consider trying to get queryjumble to mask that.
Oh wow I totally misread the bug report, sorry about that. A good night sleep
and a coffee later I see what it's about, and I agree that we shouldn't try to
mask that even if it might seem surprising.