Thank you very much Laurenz and David. Looking forward to it and unfortunatelly no, I am not in position to review
that...
So one last question, should I expect the patch to land in version 17 only or is there chance that it will also be in
lowerversions right away?
LJ
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, October 3rd, 2023 at 10:54 AM, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-03 at 08:05 +0000, byme@byme.email wrote:
>
> > "This obfuscates our monitoring because the same query with different amount of arguments gets translated into
this:
> > IN ($1, $2)
> > and so on."
> >
> > The questions are:
> > 1. Shouldnt IN behave so that the query in pg_stat_statements would look like this:
> > IN $1
> > 2. Shouldnt there be at least some flag to aggregate such queries into one?
> > 3. Is there any workaround how to aggregate those queries except the "= ANY"?
> > 4. How come no one is bothered by this if this makes pg_stat_statements unusable with lots of queries using IN,
whatothers do with this problem?
> > 5. what do you mean by changing pg_stat_statements with another view/table?
>
>
> There is currently a patch for this very problem under review:
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/44/2837/
>
> The discussion is here:
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CA+q6zcWtUbT_Sxj0V6HY6EZ89uv5wuG5aefpe_9n0Jr3VwntFg@mail.gmail.com
>
> You could comment on that patch or review it. Useful reviews and supporting
> comments help move the patch forward. That would best serve your interests.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe