On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 11:51:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> writes: > > While studying a bit more this thread, I've been reminded of the fact > > that this would treat different flavors of BEGIN/COMMIT commands (mix > > of upper/lower characters, etc.) as different entries in > > pg_stat_statements, and it feels inconsistent to me that we'd begin > > jumbling the 2PC and savepoint commands with their nodes but not do > > that for the rest of the commands, even if, as mentioned upthread, > > applications may not mix grammars. > > I've been thinking since the beginning of this thread that there > was no coherent, defensible rationale being offered for jumbling > some utility statements and not others.
Only a very small subset causes trouble in real life scenario, but I agree that cherry-picking some utility statements isn't a great approach. > I wonder if the answer is to jumble them all. We avoided that > up to now because it would imply a ton of manual effort and > future code maintenance ... but now that the backend/nodes/ > infrastructure is largely auto-generated, could we auto-generate > the jumbling code? That's a good idea. Naively, it seems doable as the infrastructure in gen_node_support.pl already supports everything that should be needed (like per-member annotation).
