This patch needs documentation. At a minimum, the new calls_underest
field needs to be listed in the description of the pg_stat_statements.
I have attached a version which includes documentation.
pg_stat_statements-identification-v4.patch.gz
You have added this email to the commit fest, but it contains no patch.
Please add the email with the actual patch.
I hope its attached now!
Maybe the author should be
given a chance to update the patches, though, because they are quite
old.
I did connect with Daniel and he did have
%3Aemail.naml
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Fujii Masao-2 [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5771213...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 3:54 PM, samthakur74 [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=5771213i=0
wrote:
You have added this email to the commit fest
I got the segmentation fault when I tested the case where the
least-executed
query statistics is discarded, i.e., when I executed different queries
more than
pg_stat_statements.max times. I guess that the patch might have a bug.
Thanks, will try to fix it.
pg_stat_statements--1.1.sql should be
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Fujii Masao-2 [via PostgreSQL]
ml-node+s1045698n5771565...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:25 PM, samthakur74 [hidden
email]http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=nodenode=5771565i=0
wrote:
I got the segmentation fault when I tested the case where
I forgot about removal of the relevant SGML, amended here in v6.
Thank you for this!
i did a quick test with following steps:
1. Applied v6 patch
2. make and make install on pg_stat_statements;
3. Restarted Postgres with pg_stat_statements loaded with
pg_stat_statements.max = 4
4. Dropped and
