> Thank you for your patch. It is really useful for tracking the history
> of generic and custom plan usage.
Thanks for the review!
> 1. Is there any reason for the double check of cplan != NULL? It seems
> unnecessary, and we could simplify it to:
>
> -if (cplan && cplan->status == PLAN_CACHE_STATUS_CUSTOM_PLAN)
> +if (cplan->status == PLAN_CACHE_STATUS_CUSTOM_PLAN)
No, it's not necessary and an oversight. removed.
> 2. Should we add Assert(kind == PGSS_EXEC) at this place to ensure that
> generic_plan_calls and custom_plan_calls are only incremented when
> appropriate?
>
I don't think an assert is needed here. There is an assert at the start of
the block for PGSS_EXEC and PGSS_PLAN, but cplan is only available
in the executor.
v4 attached
--
Sami