On 11/7/2023 05:35, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 11:48:45AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 27.01.23 03:59, Michael Paquier wrote:
At the end, that would be unnoticeable for the average user, I guess,
but here are the numbers I get on my laptop :)
Personally, I think we do not want the two jumble methods in parallel.
Maybe there are other opinions.
(Thanks Jonathan for the poke.)
Now that we are in mid-beta for 16, it would be a good time to
conclude on this open item:
"Reconsider a utility_query_id GUC to control if query jumbling of
utilities can go through the past string-only mode and the new mode?"
In Postgres ~15, utility commands used a hash of the query string to
compute their query ID. The current query jumbling code uses a Query
instead, like any other queries. I have registered this open item as
a self-reminder, mostly in case there would be an argument to have a
GUC where users could switch from one mode to another. See here as
well for some computation times for each method (table is in ns, wiht
millions of iterations):
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/y9eeyindb1acp...@paquier.xyz
I still don't think that we need both methods based on these numbers,
but there may be more opinions about that? Are people OK if this open
item is discarded?
I vote for only one method based on a query tree structure.
BTW, did you think about different algorithms of queryId generation?
Auto-generated queryId code can open a way for extensions to have
easy-supporting custom queryIds.
--
regards,
Andrey Lepikhov
Postgres Professional
